I am sick of violence in games

[marclapierre13]

Seriously, it is impossible to get a shooter these days that isn't 18+ - Haze, Timesplitters, army of two, kayne and lynch, Unreal Tournament 3, the club... The list goes on and on. When are they going to take a break from supergory gaming?

They are killing (no pun intended) a market worth billions by making next gen consoles only really suitable for 30-something gamers - please, hear my plead and create something less bloodthirsty, developers of the world!

Oh, does the baby need a bottle?

Seriously though, think of it this way: If you are going into battle in real life, do you think there is going to be *less* gore? No. Games are meant to some sort of alternate reality, where you can jump in, and control armies, or be a sniper, or hand to hand combat. It helps to have realistic fighting to make a game...more realistic.
Plus, just the fact that like GTA I can blow some ones head off is awesome. I am not a disturbed being, but there are times when I just want to do that to some of the people I meet (not literally, but you know, there are some people you would just like to strangle, so to speak). And it just makes it hella fun!

 

[marclapierre13]

well rockstar's initial over the top approach style was quite good (i really liked GTA2 with it's online playing) but GTA3 was quite a let down for me

and for shooters i think part of the reason i became so tired of it is that it really has become stale with all those games which are nearly identical... while looking fantastic though
shooters have to take a few steps back again ... shoot less and think more should be the new design rule... they should definatly evolve into more something like "first person adventures" where you have small shooting parts but also have parts where you do things differently

That is true, a lot of games are getting to be really similar. I hate when I play a game and its like a game I have played before that, and so on.

Also, as one other suggested, the Wii has way less violent video games.

 

[Chone]

I think the problem here is not the genres but rather the lack of authenticity from the developers when making a game.

If a game uses more violence than necessary, it might be considered pointless, the truth however is some games are built AROUND violence, such an example is Grand Theft Auto (which is a great game with lot of hard work and clever ideas from the developers).

I also don't understand what the big deal about violence is... sure it may sound a little cold to say that but violence is part of the real world, it's part of the life of any person, violence is authentic to the life of a human being, constant denial of suffering and "all that is bad" is extremely retarding to the growth of a human being... or why do you think the US and Europe are first-world countries? I doubt the suffering and violence from two big wars is just a mere coincidence...

What I'm trying to say, ultimately, is that violence is natural and shouldn't be seen as a sin, especially when it can be used to create interesting games. It's a valid opinion that someone may not like first person shooters but many people do, myself included. I would think it's pretty unfair to say, both to fans and developers of the genre, that FPS games are intrinsically inferior to other genres.

There has to be balance in everything and such balanced must be achieved in entertainment as well, for every Viva Pinata or Pikmin there is, there must also be a Gears of War or Grand Theft Auto, neither game is "decisively" better than the other but it's undeniable they are all remarkable pieces of human work and cleverness.

As such, I believe violence in games should NOT be eradicated, just as long as it's use is authentic and real to the nature of the game's genre and theme and to what a game is supposed to be, that is, entertainment. Violence in a game like Peggle would be pointless but it fits a game like Gears of War quite well, in this matter violence is nothing more than a resource that is NO different from cute designs or bright colors, except in this case, violence is seen a morally bad thing, unjustly and ignorantly so in my opinion.

Can anyone see what I'm trying to say?

 

[Iscariot]

Instead of game developers trying to one-up each other with original gameplay or smoother controls, it seems to becoming increasingly popular for developers to one-up each other in "edginess".

 

[MRU]

There has to be balance in everything and such balanced must be achieved in entertainment as well, for every Viva Pinata or Pikmin there is, there must also be a Gears of War or Grand Theft Auto, neither game is "decisively" better than the other but it's undeniable they are all remarkable pieces of human work and cleverness.

Yes your right, it is about balance.... But lets do the math.

(please sing in 12 days of christmas tune)....

For every Viva Pinata & Pikmin there is 9 FPS's, 8 Hack & Slash's, 7 3rd person action/shooters, 6 horror adventures, 5 dangerous drivers, 4 stealthly killers, 3 MMO's, 2 RPG assasins, and a partridge in a pear tree.


So yes its about balance, but at the moment there is no balance and that is the problem.

Instead of game developers trying to one-up each other with original gameplay or smoother controls, it seems to becoming increasingly popular for developers to one-up each other in "edginess".

Exactly! violence for the sake of outdoing the last piece of violent trash and nothing to do with gameplay.

 

[AlexisV]

I don't think the problem is too much violence, just over the top censorship. Games manufacturers are under so much pressure from various groups and afraid of bad PR that perfectly reasonable games get slapped with an 18 rating. That way, whenever anyone complains they can point to the fact that the games are unsuitable, they can point to the over 18 rating. It's completely unenforceable though really - anyone can buy a game from the internet.

I've rarely seen a game with graphic violence and really bad language. Games aren't photorealistic yet, so it will always be cartoony to some degree. Only video cut scenes could possibly be rated at 18 in my opinion, and you'd need some pretty graphic violence in those for that.

I've seen quite gory 15 rated films and even standup containing a few uses of the c-word not get an 18.

I can't think of a single game that should get an 18 through visual violence. They only give them 18 rating because of the interactivity. You have the chance to perform violent acts, even if they are visually not very disturbing, which for some reason means they get slapped with an 18.

Look at Doom 3 - some reasonably scary monsters, but it's still just a shooting gallery. Why was it given an 18?? If it was a film it would get no more than a 12A!

 

[jackshiels]

at the moment the core point of gaming has to move to gameplay, rather than graphics. Anyone who has played Halo 3 will know, it isn't about the killing, it's about the perfectly tuned shield, weapon and melee system. Core gameplay is what is going to improve in the next few years, not graphics.

 

[takao]

Oh, does the baby need a bottle?

Seriously though, think of it this way: If you are going into battle in real life, do you think there is going to be *less* gore? No. Games are meant to some sort of alternate reality, where you can jump in, and control armies, or be a sniper, or hand to hand combat. It helps to have realistic fighting to make a game...more realistic.

too bad that realistic shooters/wargames don't sell ... or even exist ... 99,99% simply is the same sort of realistic like an arnold schwarzenegger movie ... (to be more precise have you ever seen "Commando" it's exactly like that in video games)

artillery fire or even hand grenades is still nothing more than children toys in games
tanks a nuisance at best
shooting full auto while running and actually hitting something, why not ?
regaining health while crouching ... just like in real life (whoever came up with that mechanic should be strangled)
covering behind wooden doors, trees, thin walls, 2 filled sand bags will protect you from any harm
jamming guns ... never heard of it
helping injured comrades .. pfff

of course it doesn't have to be totally realistic because that wouldn't make any fun (obviously) but currently shooters/action games are mostly increasing the amount of realism in terms of gore (even exceeding reality there) and looks and everything else is still gameplay of like 10 years ago

and if not it's pre-scripted into the story line ... (like your higher ups giving orders)
currently shooters/most shooting action games are currently babysitting it's players with repeating playing mechanics over and over instead of giving them real challenges beyond "enemies are more numerous/ better armored now"

 

[JackAxe]

I think that we are now reaching a point where the video gaming demographic has clearly broken out of the sub-18 year-old...it's been that way for some time. Video games reflect their consumers' preferences, and violence in video games should not be treated differently from violence in any media.

Parents need to realize that video games are not just toys for kids anymore...

Here's the irony of it all. Even though publishers have been targeting teenagers, they had completely missed the mark. The average gamer are guys my age, monkeys in their thirties.

Check out this survey:
http://www.theesa.com/facts/top_10_facts.php

<]=)

 

[jackshiels]

I think the problem here is not the genres but rather the lack of authenticity from the developers when making a game.

If a game uses more violence than necessary, it might be considered pointless, the truth however is some games are built AROUND violence, such an example is Grand Theft Auto (which is a great game with lot of hard work and clever ideas from the developers).

I also don't understand what the big deal about violence is... sure it may sound a little cold to say that but violence is part of the real world, it's part of the life of any person, violence is authentic to the life of a human being, constant denial of suffering and "all that is bad" is extremely retarding to the growth of a human being... or why do you think the US and Europe are first-world countries? I doubt the suffering and violence from two big wars is just a mere coincidence...

Don't you think we are exposed to enough violence every day? Just turn on your TV or read a newspaper. It's all about such and such a murder or shooting, can't we take a break?

 

[Antares]

It's all about such and such a murder or shooting, can't we take a break?

Sure. Simply don't buy/play a game if it has violent content. Just as you don't have to go see/watch a violent movie. Nobody is forcing you to do either.

Games are made like they are because the masses will eat them up. Having violence and gore in games is what's currently popular. Therfore, the game makers will do whatever they can to appeal to those tastes. If sales of violent games start dropping, game makers will appeal to whatever taste is then increasing in popularity among the masses.

Most game funders are looking to maximize the potential profit in their investment. Therefore, they will often push game developers to include the content that could exactly lead to said maximum profit.

I am happy for any game that a developer creates (violent or non-violent) as long as it is free from any restrictions. The problem is that game funders push the developers for the extra pointless content just for the sake that people will be more inclined to buy the game because it has that extra content (be it violent or sexual)...or force them to remove content for the same reasons.

I personally feel that the violence in a game like Manhunt 2 is perfectly fine just as the violence in the movie, Hostel was okay. Such violence made sense for the story and fit the piece of work. What I don't like is when games have violence/sex included purely because it would appeal to potential purchasers and doesn't fit with the game.....ala BMXXX.

 

[GFLPraxis]

I personally feel that the violence in a game like Manhunt 2 is perfectly fine just as the violence in the movie, Hostel was okay. Such violence made sense for the story and fit the piece of work.

See, here's where we disagree. Manhunt 2 doesn't have a 'good story'- rather, the story only exists to put the player in incredibly violent and gory situations. It's not an epic here.

Manhunt 2 exists to do nothing more than sell on the basis of overdone violence and mass murder. It has no story, and even the gameplay sucks. If the violence is part of the story, that's one thing, and if it's a good game, that's another thing, but when a game sells ENTIRELY on the merits of violence (being a poor game with little story), that just makes me sad.

 

[MRU]

See, here's where we disagree. Manhunt 2 doesn't have a 'good story'- rather, the story only exists to put the player in incredibly violent and gory situations. It's not an epic here.

Manhunt 2 exists to do nothing more than sell on the basis of overdone violence and mass murder. It has no story, and even the gameplay sucks. If the violence is part of the story, that's one thing, and if it's a good game, that's another thing, but when a game sells ENTIRELY on the merits of violence (being a poor game with little story), that just makes me sad.

exactly my sentiment on the matter.

 

[Antares]

See, here's where we disagree. Manhunt 2 doesn't have a 'good story'- rather, the story only exists to put the player in incredibly violent and gory situations. It's not an epic here.

To be fair, I only rented the game to see what it's about...and didn't play it to death. A game doesn't necessarily always have to have an epic story. Sports games don't nor do typical fighting games or games like Mario Party. Manhunt 2 was built around the premise of a scientist escaping an asylum and doing ultra violent acts in the process. I admit, the story was weak in Manhunt 2 but the violence was justified in the context and story. The game also had some pretty cool stealthy elements.

My issue is when violence is forcibly tacked onto a game purely for the purpose of increasing sales of that game. Manhunt 2 was designed from the beginning with violence in mind as part of the story and not simply "tacked on" as an afterthought. It's not like they had a mediocre game and said, "well, this game sucks but what can we do to get people to buy it? Hmm...let's add nudity and gore." That is something I have an issue with.

Otherwise, if a game developer really wants gore in their game, who are we really to judge them? It's their work of art. It's they're vision (unless they're forced to add things). If we don't like it, don't buy the game. I view this in the same way as other media. There are violent and explicit books, comics and movies. Conversely, there are non-violent, non-explicit types of each. If I don't like the content, I won't support it.

I see nothing wrong with having games that cater to different tastes. Now, if it seems like there is more and more graphic violence in videogames, nowadays, it more points to the fact that the general gaming population wants that type of imagery. And that's also what is kind of sad.

Hmm...remember how Mortal Kombat had the option to turn blood off? What if game makers had that as an option in games? Gore effects would be disabled if you didn't want them...

 

[NAG]

You know, generally saying "but Madden and Mario Party do it" isn't that great of a defense. Yeah, they sell. But I wouldn't mistake them for good games. It is kind of like how American beer sells.

 

[robanga]

Violence appeals. It's an escape from the more mundane world into something heroic and epic. It was here long before video games. As a child, most of my friends played with soldiers and GI Joes. The desire to hunt is in most of the male gender and some of the female side too.

Having said that, there is a point were the reality of a game can be a bit too real. I will give you that. Trying to find Xbox 360 games or computer games for my 10 year old son, that do not have spurting arteries or exploding heads has become more of a challenge.

The best I have come up with is older original xbox titles like "Toy Soldiers" and Windows XP games such as "Axis and Allies"

 

[galganog]

The problem with all you noobs who cry about violence in video games is this.

NONE OF YOU HAVE ANY CLUE WHAT REAL VIOLENCE IS!

You never have experienced, seen it or know what it is in your life. You hear about it on the news or have an expectation about it. There is a total psychological difference between shooting and killing a person in real life as opposed to shooting and killing pixels.

The main thing is this EMPATHY. I know friends who have shot and killed people in real life and have nightmares about it or seen their friends die. No one has nightmares about shooting or killing the aliens from Halo unless they have no grounds in reality.

There is no such thing as violence in video games they are simulations. Thats it. Learn your frigging boundries and stop whining about violence or gore. And teach your god damn HELL SPAWN : AKA KIDS what the hell violence is and how to treat other people. In all videogames there is conflict and conflict leads to violence.

for the TL;DR: SHUT UP NOOBs STOP QQING AND LET ME GET BACK TO BOOM HEADSHOTTING PEOPLE.

 

[pulsewidth947]

Call me jaded, but I don't even notice the violence in games. I mostly play FPS, my current fave being Team Fortress 2. I don't think this is too bad a game. Yes there is blood and you are trying to kill the other team, but its so daft that its unrealistic.

In terms of games like Manhunt, yes maybe they have gone too far. I watched the videos to see what the fuss was about and all I remember thinking was - this looks really really dull.

I've played a few violent games - GTA, loads of FPS, etc and I can't say it's affected me in anyway. I have no desire to hurt anyone else, so I don't really see this being too much of a problem.

If a game is violent and you don't like violence, then don't buy it. There are plenty of great games with little or no violence - Wii Sports, Portal, Mario, Ico, Chu Chu Rocket etc.

 

[robanga]

NONE OF YOU HAVE ANY CLUE WHAT REAL VIOLENCE IS!

You never have experienced, seen it or know what it is in your life. QUOTE]

That is making a broad assumption about people you do not know. I have been shot at as well as seen people die in front of me.

 

[galganog]

NONE OF YOU HAVE ANY CLUE WHAT REAL VIOLENCE IS!

You never have experienced, seen it or know what it is in your life. QUOTE]

That is making a broad assumption about people you do not know. I have been shot at as well as seen people die in front of me.

You must of had a medpack nearby to get your health back.

AMIRITE?

 

[pulsewidth947]

You must of had a medpack nearby to get your health back.

AMIRITE?

lol

 

[tk421]

Oh, does the baby need a bottle?

Seriously though, think of it this way: If you are going into battle in real life, do you think there is going to be *less* gore? No. Games are meant to some sort of alternate reality, where you can jump in, and control armies, or be a sniper, or hand to hand combat. It helps to have realistic fighting to make a game...more realistic.
Plus, just the fact that like GTA I can blow some ones head off is awesome. I am not a disturbed being, but there are times when I just want to do that to some of the people I meet (not literally, but you know, there are some people you would just like to strangle, so to speak). And it just makes it hella fun!

That's silly. Most games are not at all realistic, and that's what people like about them. Movies aren't realistic either, nor should they all be. There are some exceptions, but most games allow you to do things that would be impossible in real life, including FPS games.

 

[Agathon]

I can't see the point in complaining myself. Halo 3 has a lot of bombs and guns in it, but not much in the way of blood and guts. Team Fortress 2 plays like a Road Runner cartoon with guns and slapstick.

GoW is probably the most violent game I own, but the whole point of the game is that it's set in a scary universe during an awful war with aliens who want to do horrible things to people. UT has the same graphics, but is nowhere near as violent. In essence, it's a game of electronic tag.

GTA is a lot of fun. The premise of the game is that people were fed up playing games where you were a cop. Sometimes it's fun to play the robber or the outlaw. After all, you don't have to be Dylan Kliebold or Eric Harris to secretly want to blow up your school. Their problem was that they actually attempted to. Everyone feels victimized by society at some point. Well, if a cop attempts to give you a ticket in one of these games, or someone disses you, you can wreak immediate and violent revenge. I don't think I've had as much fun in a game as I have had in Saint's Row when I'm being chased around the museum park and business district by the cops, the Feds, and sharpshooters in helicopters (it was my fault for "borrowing" a police car).

People like violent movies about criminals because most people wonder what it would be like to live outside the law. Most of us aren't going to, but no-one has ever proved that playing such games or watching such movies is going to make us more likely to become criminals.

It's not as if people have become more violent. 200 years ago people used to have a family day out at a public execution. The guillotine, when it was introduced, was taken as a sign of enlightenment and progress. Now the US is regarded as barbaric and backward because it executes by lethal injection. People also used to think actual war was glorious and ennobling. It's getting pretty hard to find people who still think like that. Look at modern war movies compared to those from 50-60 years ago. Saving Private Ryan would never have been made in the 40s.

 

[0098386]

I'm sick of OTT violence too. Games like GTA and all that are okay for me, it's the stupidly gory games like GoW and GoW that really get on my face.

 

[DashTheory9]

Lame=No Common Sense

If You Cant Handle Violence In Games, STAY AWAY FROM SHOOTING GAMES. Uhh.. Can It Be Anymore Simple Than That. Don't Whine About It Too Others, Just Dont Play Them. Ridiculous.