Support NeoGAF

[Crossing Eden]

uncharted isn't a game where everyone is armed and trying to kill each other, that would be something along the lines of a CoD, also lets remember child soldiers are also technically armed people, doubt anyone would make an argument it's cool to go there and kill them.

Nathan Drake chooses to go to where likely impoverished people are being exploited, and proceeds to kill them all not always in self defense, since many times the engagement is started by him, all this in a quest to get some lost treasure (and likely some fame).

Could you post an example of Nathan Drake starting the conflict and not using self defense, and on impoverished people. Because the main enemies in Uncharted games are usually rich people and their guards.

 

[swazzyswess]

Nathan Drake chooses to go to where likely impoverished people are being exploited, and proceeds to kill them all not always in self defense, since many times the engagement is started by him, all this in a quest to get some lost treasure (and likely some fame).

Go to YT and find a single video from an Uncharted game where Drake attacks someone who doesn't already have a loaded gun ready to be used against Drake or someone who is not already attempting to engage in combat. Find proof he indiscriminately kills civilians or stop with this nonsense.

Edit: Crossing Eden beat me to it.

 

[Mesoian]

Could you post an example of Nathan Drake starting the conflict and not using self defense, and on impoverished weaponless people? Because the main enemies in Uncharted games are usually rich people and their guards.

That horrible horrible pirate graveyard section in uncharted 3 that should have been cut because it's boring and stupid. You start the fight, but it doesn't matter because they're pirates.

Then you get chastised by the former game's second for being there at all and continuing to fight over something that lost meaning decades ago.

uncharted isn't a game where everyone is armed and trying to kill each other, that would be something along the lines of a CoD, also lets remember child soldiers are also technically armed people, doubt anyone would make an argument it's cool to go there and kill them.

What? Yes it is. In Uncharted, I can only think of two sequences you play where literally every character isn't armed, and one of them has you playing as a child.

 

[jailbird20022]

I don't get the issue with the game, especially since we have movies like the SAW series, two (soon to be THREE) Human Centipede movies, both Purge movies and Serbian Film.

Just seems kinda unfair in my book to give one entertainment medium so much hell and let the other off scot free.

 

[swazzyswess]

That horrible horrible pirate graveyard section in uncharted 3 that should have been cut because it's boring and stupid. You start the fight, but it doesn't matter because they're pirates.

Those aren't unarmed, defenseless civilians. Sorry.

Did you think they were patrolling with weapons to find food or something?

 

[Mesoian]

I don't get the issue with the game, especially since we have movies like the SAW series, two (soon to be THREE) Human Centipede movies, both Purge movies and Serbian Film.

Just seems kinda unfair in my book to give one entertainment medium so much hell and let the other off scot free.

Those movies don't get off scott free, they're universally panned as being terrible. People watch them because some of them have an established cult status for being "so bad, it's good."

Seriously, those purge movies are COMICALLY terrible. They are horror movies written as comedies.

 

[Crossing Eden]

That horrible horrible pirate graveyard section in uncharted 3 that should have been cut because it's boring and stupid. You start the fight, but it doesn't matter because they're pirates.

Then you get chastised by the former game's second for being there at all and continuing to fight over something that lost meaning decades ago.

You mean the pirate graveyard that starts out with Nathan Drake getting tortured? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jirCQnjz3ok
And sorry but that one line of the villain doing the very cliche "Oh you're just as bad as me mang, me, the person who was hours earlier praising hitler and stalin!" It just falls on deaf ears when the villain is as cartoonishly evil as that. Also like others said, they were all armed except for the ones who seemingly drop out of the sky during the fist fight scene.

 

[Mesoian]

Those aren't unarmed, defenseless civilians. Sorry.

Did you think they were patrolling with weapons to find food or something?

They aren't attacking you, they are defending their base. Nathan Drake is the instigator in that sequence. It's a similar situation to you raiding the bank in GTA4.

But no, there are no sequences where you're killing unarmed civilians, just inactive combatants, which are still contextualized as being bad because reasons.

You mean the pirate graveyard that starts out with Nathan Drake getting tortured? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jirCQnjz3ok
And sorry but that one line of the villain doing the very cliche "Oh you're just as bad as me mang, me, the person who was hours earlier praising hitler and stalin!" It just falls on deaf ears when the villain is as cartoonishly evil as that. Also like others said, they were all armed except for the ones who seemingly drop out of the sky during the fist fight scene.

You're not wrong. No one's questioning the absurdity of the sequence. Hell, I think the entire level should have been removed.

 

[Pinko Marx]

I Think Its Great that A game for Once is Unapologetic about its ultraviolence without trying to justify it with some skin deep social commentary or deeper meaning other than "it's what we wanted to make".

 

[Crossing Eden]

They aren't attacking you, they are defending their base. Nathan Drake is the instigator in that sequence.

How is he the instigator if he was literally moments before getting tortured and they were gonna kill him the second he revealed his info?

 

[Alienous]

This is probably the worst thread to have the Nathan Drake debate in. Yes, he's a largely unacknowledged murderous sociopath, but he's far from an evil person doing evil things.

 

[Mdk7]

It's frankly a bit too much, yet i am sort of intrigued.

 

[Handy Fake]

uncharted isn't a game where everyone is armed and trying to kill each other, that would be something along the lines of a CoD, also lets remember child soldiers are also technically armed people, doubt anyone would make an argument it's cool to go there and kill them.

Nathan Drake chooses to go to where likely impoverished people are being exploited, and proceeds to kill them all not always in self defense, since many times the engagement is started by him, all this in a quest to get some lost treasure (and likely some fame).
In any other world a person/character that would go to an impoverished part of the world with the sole objective to try and steal what is there and in this process kill people, would at least be seen as a person that isn't very nice, but in the world of gaming this character is considered charismatic, cool and what not, I'm sure some people even think his a nice guy. The truth however is that he's a murdering thief.

So in short in Hatred we have what is clearly a disturbed individual, going around killing people (some of them are also armed), and in uncharted we have what appears to be a reasonably normal white male, going to other countries to steal things and kill anyone that is in his way (making jokes during the journey BTW). Now it's perfectly fine to think one is better than the other, either as a game or as a social statement, but to glorify one and vilify the other, seems hypocritical.

In all honesty, I think you're just being deliberately obtuse using this reasoning to defend "Hatred".

If you like the idea behind the game, then by all means go for it. But the aim of the developers was to elicit the visceral reactions we're seeing and I don't think even they would defend their game mechanics by comparing them to the Uncharted series.

 

[Mesoian]

I Think Its Great that A game for Once is Unapologetic about its ultraviolence without trying to justify it with some skin deep social commentary or deeper meaning other than "it's what we wanted to make".

I mean...arena shooters do that all the time.

 

[TheCrow]

I don't get the issue with the game, especially since we have movies like the SAW series, two (soon to be THREE) Human Centipede movies, both Purge movies and Serbian Film.

Just seems kinda unfair in my book to give one entertainment medium so much hell and let the other off scot free.

People still have issues with those movies and I assume they'd be the same people who take issue with Hatred. I've seen all those movies so I have no problem with Hatred. But I also understand that some people will and thats fine too.

 

[Mesoian]

This is probably the worst thread to have the Nathan Drake debate in. Yes, he's a largely unacknowledged murderous sociopath, but he's far from an evil person doing evil things.

It's the context argument again. "Do the ends justify the means", especially when the end goal for most Drake missions, at least initially before super villain of the week steps in is "let's get paid, fuck everyone in our way."

 

[Handy Fake]

I worry about the world reading some of the replies on this thread, in all honesty.

I'm out.

 

[Tagyhag]

Ahh this brings back memories of Postal, I don't really remember it having this much controversy though.

I wonder if it's because of the non-realistic graphics or just the changing sensitivities in what a game should be able to do.

 

[Messofanego]

Seriously, those purge movies are COMICALLY terrible. They are horror movies written as comedies.

Purge Anarchy is actually pretty good.

 

[Naughty_Doge]

The artstyle is stunning, but the game itself looks uninteresting and ridiculous. It's not even about the violence, I think I've seen worse in games, but about violence being the only thing this game has going for it.

The concept is so stupid it's not even funny.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Looks pretty true to me.

Black :52
White Cop :59
Black 1:00
Black 1:03
White woman 1:07
Asian woman 1:10
Black 1:16
Black 1:21
Black woman 1:23

These are just the ones from the close ups that I could actually see.

Something to add to this is that Jaroslaw (the guy who liked that hate group on Facebook) also happens to be the guy that edits trailers for the company. At least according to their website since it mentions to not bother him while he's working on trailers. So...yeah...

 

[Pinko Marx]

I mean...arena shooters do that all the time.

But for different reasons. The gore in an arena shooter is there to make it all the more satisfying when you frag an opponent due to its competitiveness. This game is gorey just cuz.

 

[AllIsOneIsNone]

I don't get the issue with the game, especially since we have movies like the SAW series, two (soon to be THREE) Human Centipede movies, both Purge movies and Serbian Film.

Just seems kinda unfair in my book to give one entertainment medium so much hell and let the other off scot free.

Well there's a reason the media has chosen games over movies as a motivator for mass murders. The main one probably being that you yourself play the person that goes around killing everyone rather than viewing other people do it. Both have the supposed ability to desensitize you to violence, but surely becoming the one who commits the acts is taking it to the next step.

By the way I'm not condemning the right for people to create or play what they want, I'm just saying that there is a difference.

 

[Oldschoolgamer]

I don't get the issue with the game, especially since we have movies like the SAW series, two (soon to be THREE) Human Centipede movies, both Purge movies and Serbian Film.

Just seems kinda unfair in my book to give one entertainment medium so much hell and let the other off scot free.

They all get more than their fare share of criticism. This isn't a shot at you, but I feel like anyone still bringing up horror movies, as some form of rebuttal, doesn't follow them or watch them... :/

Funny you mention the Purge movies though. They are huge critiques on American gun culture, patriotism, class, and violence. They have a message and didn't need the directors to tell the audience what they were trying to say. Anarchy was a good movie too.

 

[Mesoian]

How is he the instigator if he was literally moments before getting tortured and they were gonna kill him the second he revealed his info?

Another example would be the first real combat sequence in Uncharted 2 when Drake and Sully are infiltrating the enemy base in order to steal the maps and data on where the stuff in Napal is.

To be fair, you can be non lethal for most of that mission, but then the game decides it's time to teach you how to use grenades and forces you out of stealth and into a combat situation, which, in retrospect, is kind of lame, but at the time was fine.

It happens, and the point is, it's not really all that important whether it happens or not, the Uncharted games aren't structured around using your moral compass as related to traversal or combat. It's a pop corn movie. We don't get into the deep moral questions of Terminator 2 or Predator because, in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter. The loose context we use to wrap instance of violence to instance of violence is what's important, even if it's paper thin and often times stupid, and the fact that Hatred doesn't seem to have that is what makes it seem appalling. The thinnest veil of context could very easily change this project into something that people have difficulty stomaching into something that could be thought provoking and interesting.

No one questions ultraviolence when they see it in something like American History X because it has a purpose.

But for different reasons. The gore in an arena shooter is there to make it all the more satisfying when you frag an opponent due to its competitiveness. This game is gorey just cuz.

That's a stretch...

Back in the day we turned that shit off because it would slow down our computers.

 

[Micael]

Could you post an example of Nathan Drake starting the conflict and not using self defense, and on impoverished people. Because the main enemies in Uncharted games are usually rich people and their guards.

Any part where you start using stealth, or where you start the engagement, whenever there is a choice to not kill someone (IE they are not actively engaging you), and you choose to kill that person, you are murdering them, it's not self defense, it's murder, lets remember here, nathan drake most of the times, is in those situations, by his own choice, he wasn't forced into an armed conflict, he doesn't need to go and steal treasure to feed himself, there isn't even the all angle of for king and country, since he isn't there to bring "freedom and civilization".
You are not allowed to kill people just because they are armed and may pose a threat (not in rational civilized society anyway), someone being armed, or being a guard, or what ever does not make it OK to kill them. If I were to enter someones house, that person might very well try to kill me, it wouldn't make it ok for me to kill them (much less preemptively).

I'm not even making some new argument here, it's not even original, it has been very well covered http://gaming.thedigitalfix.com/content/id/2467/nathan-drake-hero-or-mass-murderer.html http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2013/05...-drake-from-treasure-hunter-to-mass-murderer/

In all honesty, I think you're just being deliberately obtuse using this reasoning to defend "Hatred".

If you like the idea behind the game, then by all means go for it. But the aim of the developers was to elicit the visceral reactions we're seeing and I don't think even they would defend their game mechanics by comparing them to the Uncharted series.

I'm not defending Hatred, I'm not even saying what Hatred does is ok (although I think it is), my problem is with glorifying something, and then vilifying something else, for reasons that are present on the thing that is being glorified.

 

[Fjordson]

That's kinda fucked. Strictly speaking for myself, I don't see how that would be fun at all. No humour, no evil to combat. Literally just angrily murdering innocent people? Just the trailer made me uncomfortable.

 

[Pinko Marx]

That's kinda fucked. Strictly speaking for myself, I don't see how that would be fun at all. No humour, no evil to combat. Literally just angrily murdering innocent people? Just the trailer me uncomfortable.

Isn't it awesome that a game could elicit such a response? I think it's great. At its very base level that's what art is: to draw an emotional response out of its viewer. And sometimes that emotion isn't always a good one.

 

[Exr]

Looks like Postal. Not my kind of thing, but I sure as shit hope that the people put off by this game dont play GTA, Manhunt, Saints Row or any other violent games. Poor taste possibly, but that doesnt mean the game shouldnt be made.

 

[Messofanego]

Something to add to this is that Jaroslaw (the guy who liked that hate group on Facebook) also happens to be the guy that edits trailers for the company. At least according to their website since it mentions to not bother him while he's working on trailers. So...yeah...

Oh (dude on far left)...

"Keeps good morale in the team by finding pictures of beautiful women on the internet and sending them around". Classy.

 

[Tomeru]

That's what I like to say when I'm playing GTA Online.

"Stop giving me dehumanizing stares across the map, don't make me go defend myself."

Bad guys in Uncharted will shoot you first if you stand still, so I don't see how you can say that.

 

[ZoddGutts]

#Gamergate2, just no backroom sex involve here.

 

[swazzyswess]

Any part where you start using stealth, or where you start the engagement, whenever there is a choice to not kill someone (IE they are not actively engaging you), and you choose to kill that person, you are murdering them, it's not self defense, it's murder

Please show me a video from Uncharted where it is possible to stealth your way around defenseless people who aren't already trying to kill you and/or looking for you so they can kill you.

 

[Alienous]

"Keeps good morale in the team by finding pictures of beautiful women on the internet and sending them around". Classy.

Many straight men like looking at pictures of sexy women. Shocking.

 

[TheCrow]

Many straight men like looking at pictures of sexy women. Shocking.

How evil!

 

[Fuz]

I'm personally against all kind of censorship, be Hatred, be GTA or Carmageddon, and don't think "videogames make people violent and let them go into a killing spree".
Let's leave this bullshit to jack thompson.

I have read on twitter people are emailing Epic about their engine being associated with this game. Can Epic realistically do anything about it?

Why don't they write to guns manufacturers?

 

[CHC]

Oh my God this game is actually not satire....

I try to not be shallow but... look at these dudes.

 

[Mask]

Regardless of what the developers support, and I'm not condoning it in any way, shape or form, this game, as disgusting as it is to some people, still has the right to exist.

This is a freedom of speech matter, plain and simple. You have the right to be upset, complain, call for the government to ban it, and that's your right, and this game has the right to be made, and really, is anything you see in this game as bad as the things you can do right now in games like Manhunt and GTA? This is a PC game, far removed from the realms of console gaming, free from restriction by ratings and a veritable Wild West of indie development, filled with Japanese Guro games, flash games like The Torture Game, RPGmaker horror games, mods that might not necessarily be your cup of tea, and many more things that you'd never see on consoles, and this game won't be touching consoles anyway. There are games that are far far worse than Hatred, and they've gone unnoticed because they are PC games. This would have done the same, but all the media attention has made this into Manhunt 2.0.

I likely won't support this, especially not if the developers are supporting what they're suspected of, but I support the right to create anything, free of censorship.

 

[swazzyswess]

I'm personally against all kind of censorship, be Hatred, be GTA or Carmageddon, and don't think "videogames make people violent and let them go into a killing spree".
Let's leave this bullshit to jack thompson.

Good thing basically NO ONE in this thread has argued for censorship. That's a strawman that doesn't engage the game and what it's doing on any meaningful level.

 

[-MD-]

"Keeps good morale in the team by finding pictures of beautiful women on the internet and sending them around". Classy.

Millions of people do this.

I try to not be shallow but... look at these dudes.

Elaborate.

Good thing basically NO ONE in this thread has argued for censorship. .

There's been more than a handful of posts asking it to be canceled/banned from sale.

 

[rager]

Don't worry, in about a few months after release, most people will become desensitized to the violence and it will become game of the year. Sad world we live in.

 

[Micael]

Please show me a video from Uncharted where it is possible to stealth your way around defenseless people who aren't already trying to kill you and/or looking for you so they can kill you.

I would, but I never said that he killed defenseless people (I think, if I did my mistake), you don't need to kill someone that is defenseless, for it to be murder. If I invade someones house and I kill them it doesn't make it ok just because they have a gun and they are going to shoot me, I would have committed murder.
Thinking someone is going to kill you, also doesn't give you the right to kill them (well laws vary obviously, but as a general rule).

Also should be strongly pointed out, that while you as a player may not have a choice to go through a section without killing anyone, the character, does have a choice, he has a choice to not put himself in a position where he has to kill people, and invade areas and so on, it's his choice to kill people.

EDITED: Oh yeah but if you want one section where you kill someone (or at least very significantly injure them) that is defenseless, you have the museum guards section.

 

[Fjordson]

Looks like Postal. Not my kind of thing, but I sure as shit hope that the people put off by this game dont play GTA, Manhunt, Saints Row or any other violent games. Poor taste possibly, but that doesnt mean the game shouldnt be made.

Saints Row and GTA feel pretty differently than this to me. The violence is there in all three, but the context surrounding it isn't. The humour, the satire, the characters, the swift consequences when you break the law in GTA, most of the mission objectives. There are similarities to Hatred obviously, but they operate in a different space to me.

I haven't played Manhunt, but wasn't that like in a prison or something? Killing gang members would fight back? I don't remember that being about just mass murdering civilians (could be wrong here).

Isn't it awesome that a game could elicit such a response? I think it's great. At its very base level that's what art is: to draw an emotional response out of its viewer. And sometimes that emotion isn't always a good one.

I guess so. And I'm not saying it shouldn't be made. Just not sure how this would be fun in any way.

 

[Denton]

Millions of people do this.

Yeah but none of them would post about it publicly in their "about" info.
These guys really go deep on the whole "we are politically incorrect and don't give a shit" aspect.

 

[rottingcore]

So... is hatred any worse than going on a killing spree or rampage in gta? I



Forbes calls it a mass murder SIMULATOR

Destructoid calls it a LITERAL murder SIMULATOR

I think we're going to see lots of hyperbole about this game.

People defend violence in video games all the time. So I wonder how some of those people will act in the face of a game that does it a little different. From what I can tell, it doesn't even do it THAT much different.

The only difference is that this game seems to promote the mass murder of innocent people, instead of the player seeking it out on their own. Either way, game developers have the right to produce whatever content they want, and consumers have the right to purchase said content if it's to their liking.

 

[Melchiah]

Thumbs up just because they're not apologizing for anything. I personally think there's no difference between the different entertainment mediums. There's far more worse content available in literature and films, but the average people and mainsteam media seem to think games are still for kids. I'd like to see the day when games aren't anymore shackled to a different level due to some preconceived notions. We're slowly getting there, but the progress could be a bit more faster as I'm not growing any younger, and I'm tired of waiting after playing games since the early 80's.

That being said, the game doesn't really seem to be something I'd enjoy playing for longer, as I like the games to have a bit more depth, and I don't really fancy the likes of GTA and Dead Rising either.

 

[Handy Fake]

Bish posted this on the other now locked thread regarding the interview with the devs.

If you want context...


http://fucknovideogames.tumblr.com/...s-a-genocide-simulator-developed-by-neo-nazis

 

[TheCrow]

Bish posted this on the other now locked thread regarding the interview with the devs.

If you want context...


http://fucknovideogames.tumblr.com/...s-a-genocide-simulator-developed-by-neo-nazis

As long as it doesn't directly influence the game(as in you can only kill minorities) it doesn't affect my interest in Hatred. I'm able to separated the creator from his work, for example, I can still love mel gibson movies but not like him as a person.

 

[Exr]

Saints Row and GTA feel pretty differently than this to me. The violence is there in all three, but the context surrounding it isn't. The humour, the satire, the characters, the swift consequences when you break the law in GTA, most of the mission objectives. There are similarities to Hatred obviously, but they operate in a different space to me.

I haven't played Manhunt, but wasn't that like in a prison or something? Killing gang members would fight back? I don't remember that being about just mass murdering civilians (could be wrong here).


I guess so. And I'm not saying it shouldn't be made. Just not sure how this would be fun in any way.

I agree that GTA and Saints row lack the context for violence that this game has, and you're right about Manhunt. That was a poor example. I guess what I'm saying is that while some might find the context of the violence in this game distasteful, they have to understand that there are others more removed from gaming media that find the same distaste with GTA and Saints Row, regardless of context. While GTA doesn't (usually) provide incentive for killing civilians you can still do it at any time and on a large scale.
I'm not arguing for the quality of this game, I'm arguing that the people calling for bans on the product are out of line. They can exhibit distaste for the games context but they can't be asking for bans or censoring of it without coming of like a hypocrite at some point. I watched A Serbian Film and didn't like it at all, but it has a right to exist in its form without censorship.

 

[Handy Fake]

As long as it doesn't directly influence the game(as in you can only kill minorities) it doesn't affect my interest in Hatred. I'm able to separated the creator from his work, for example, I can still love mel gibson movies but not like him as a person.

Not at all, I agree.

I would however question the motives behind the game itself.