• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Hatred - Reveal & Gameplay Trailer

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ray Wonder

Founder of the Wounded Tagless Children
I feel like they sat down in their meeting room and asked,

"What type of game can we get on the news, we need exposure!"

"A game where we mass murder innocent people for no reason?"

"Perfect. MUUHAAAHAHA."
 

D4Danger

Unconfirmed Member
Drake is no different than an action hero like Indy or Han Solo. Likeable guys who kill bad people in fun action movies.

It's not the same as an utterly grim and very graphic murdering the innocent people sim.

This thread is going to get stuck in an infinite loop because people can't tell the difference
 

Kimosabae

Banned
I just hope this game manages to get released. It deserves to exist, even though I'm not sure I'd play it. I have a feeling the coming controversy might get it cancelled, if it really is playing things as straight as it seems.
 
Can't find a Twitter account for the devs, so my million questions will have to wait. :/
I'm interested, but I just can't think of this as anything but 2edgy4me
 

soultron

Banned
Well, that's ok then. Right?

It's not. My point is that Drake isn't someone presented as a caricature of a metal fan who's sole purpose is killing people. Drake has contextual motivations and fighting and killing equally armed enemies are only obstacles, not his end goal. The police seem to be the only armed enemies in this game. And it seems they're provoked into being enemies when the player character breaks the law. (Also, if it helps my argument, I'm really not OK with how Drake never really reconciles how many people he kills. He never feels guilty about it, from the bits of Uncharted games I've seen and played.)

If there's some grand twist to the story here, or deeper characterization, I'd love to be privy to it. Why did the character get to this point? What's his reasoning for doing the things he is doing?
 

jonnyp

Member
I'm going to go against the grain here and say that it looks really fun.

I can't see how this is different to slaughtering NPC's in any game. (GTA, TombRaider, Uncharted, COD etc).



It's a game.

There are people out there, serial killers, who have killed just to experience taking a life. These people are fucked up, but not everyone needs a backstory to make them fit into the theory that they must be driven somehow by an external situation.

What is wrong with a game that has brutality for brutality's sake?



Exactly.


I don't have a problem with this game getting made and released but I won't personally play it.

That said, you seriously don't see the difference between this and GTA, Tomb Raider, Uncharted? Seriously?
 

Servbot #42

Unconfirmed Member
The problem that I have is the fidelity in which you're being shown the cause and effect. I've not played GTA, but in HM, you're not shown super detailed imagery of women begging for their lives before having a pistol inserted into their mouth and then executed in cold blood. Part of what makes the brutality in HM easier to stomach is that it's obfuscated by the presentation, just like how in an Uncharted game, Drake's witty quips distract you from how horrible of a human you really are for killing so many people and then (him) laughing about it.

I agree that the presentation of Hatred is extremely graphic compared to my examples but Hatred isn't the first game where you can do heinous shit, all i'm saying is that most people don't have a problem with videogame violence as long as it has a digestible context.
 

Unison

Member
I don't have a problem with this game getting made and released but I won't personally play it.

That said, you seriously don't see the difference between this and GTA, Tomb Raider, Uncharted? Seriously?

Not sure I see the difference between this game and something like Quake multiplayer, where you are essentially killing others to blow off steam.
 
Not sure I see the difference between this game and something like Quake multiplayer, where you are essentially killing others to blow off steam.

This is a game about killing civilians.

Quake is a game about killing competitors.

It's a really big difference....
 

soultron

Banned
Well, for one thing, those people are killing you right back.

Yeah. Everyone has weapons, the setting is entirely fictional and not anything like the world we live in, and the characters don't have emotional states that can express things like begging for their lives.
 
Fucking gross. Not saying people shouldn't be allowed to create vile trash like this, but that doesn't change what it is. Why would you choose to poor countless hours developing such a disgusting game?

Also, is that Nathan Explosion?
 

Raptor

Member
My kind of game.

Though if you are having seconds thoughts on becoming a serial murderous psychopat better stay away from this one.
 

inki

Member
Oh...oh my.

I for one don't like this type of game so I won't play it (mechanics wise). The voice over seems to give it a context of ... I hate everything and everyone and I want to die violently, but I'm going to take as many people with me as I can. Ala Mass Murder simulator 2014.

I know video games are not reality and they can do anything they want but I don't think in this case they should have gone this route.
 

Unison

Member
I guess I am not very thin skinned about this stuff... I've seen dozens of games that do this sort of thing over the years.

I feel like if everyone was wearing a turban in this game, no one would be flinching.

That's not a judgment... if this particular disturbs people, that's understandable, but it seems like a matter of degrees when comparing this to most other violent games, at best, to me.
 

Wiktor

Member
Interesting. First Postal was intruguing because it aproached it's theme with straight face, while the two sequels went for farce
 

Allforce

Member
Man I normally don't get shook up over stuff done for shock value but this is a pretty ridiculous line to cross at this time in our country's history. If there's some biting satire (it's all a dream!) or some other message to it then maybe I can see the hook to it, but this just hits too close to home for some of us who have lost people in the HUNDREDS of mass shootings that this country has experienced over the last 15-20 years.

I mean, is there a level in a kindergarten? Or even a school? With terrified students cowering in classrooms and escaping out of windows?

How about a crowded movie theater during a big premiere?

Maybe a rally for a congresswoman should be in there, and you show up guns blazing to show em who's ANGRY.

Or a college campus? That'll show em how edgy they are!

Honestly the game looks technically solid and pretty fun, all they'd have to do is make your character some ripoff of The Terminator and all the controversy would be gone. Let players make up their own stories if they want to think they're one of these maniacs who have ruined so many lives.
 

UrbanRats

Member
Nathan Drake kills people trying to kill him. They generally shoot first, and let's face it, none of these people are hired to do any good (like letting lose a swarm of sealed zombies, gaining the power of a tree, or hell, just using the powers of a lost city for some illusory bio-weapon). Hell, Drake goes out of his way to not kill innocents, as seen in UC2's first level.

Context is what separates defending yourself Indiana Jones style and being an Edgemaster 5000.

Edit: I'm not saying games like this can't exist, because then we'd go down a slippery slope of what's acceptable and what's not. But I can make fun of how overly edgey it's trying to be and how it reminds me of that kid in high school who just hated everyone.

"Gaining the power of a tree" doesn't sound so bad to me :(

Sounds a lot like green energy.
 
Eh, change the narrative around and it's the same game but accepted. There have been a ton of more violent games out there. The only thing to get hung up on here is the story of the character.
 

allftw

Neo Member
This is fucking atrocious.

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that it looks really fun.

I can't see how this is different to slaughtering NPC's in any game. (GTA, TombRaider, Uncharted, COD etc).

Exactly.

Come on now let's not act like there is no difference between killing mercs and other armed guys and killing civilians. And zombies. Really?

I'm not saying that the killing in those games are completely justified but it's there because
AAA
devs have a hard time making and selling none violent games. Whereas it looks like violence is the sole point of this game and the devs seem pretty proud of it as well.
 
I guess I am not very thin skinned about this stuff... I've seen dozens of games that do this sort of thing over the years.

I feel like if everyone was wearing a turban in this game, no one would be flinching.

That's not a judgment... if this particular disturbs people, that's understandable, but it seems like a matter of degrees when comparing this to most other violent games, at best, to me.

I'm pretty sure there'd be an even bigger outcry if it was just your character gunning down middle eastern civilians....

Other games you have some motivation for your violence. Theyr zombies, theyr badguys, theyr terrorists.

There's none of that here. Just what appears to be unarmed civilians.
Just EDGEY violence for the sake of violence.

Even something like GTA where you can act out similar levels of violence to random innocent civis doesn't make that the focus of the games missions, most of the people you kill are either just as bad or worse than you.
 

soultron

Banned
I guess I am not very thin skinned about this stuff... I've seen dozens of games that do this sort of thing over the years.

I feel like if everyone was wearing a turban in this game, no one would be flinching.

That's not a judgment... if this particular disturbs people, that's understandable, but it seems like a matter of degrees when comparing this to most other violent games, at best, to me.

See, this line of reasoning doesn't resonate with me.

This game would be just as reprehensible if it was set in the Middle East and you were slaughtering unarmed civilians in turbans and/or burkas. (Depending on where you set the game, people may or may not wear these garments.)
 

Bastos

Member
Looks fun, and apparently the hit reactions are awesome like the ones from GTA.

Just hope the isn't about killing civilians, there has to be some action, I know they said that you would shoot cops, etc, but if the game is just "kill for high scores" it's going to be boring.

We could target the Mafia, etc, just killing civilians is pointless.
 

Servbot #42

Unconfirmed Member
There was this fucking PC game that someone made a neogaf thread about years ago and it was about this clearly mentally ill person that killed people because a voice in his head told him so. I kinda want to check out that game now because i read it treated the subject matter right and somehow i don't think Hatred will explore those issues in the right way, too bad i can't remember the name of the game.
 
Not sure I see the difference between this game and something like Quake multiplayer, where you are essentially killing others to blow off steam.

Well for one Quake is a fantasy sci-fi setting, but more importantly I'm pretty sure the people you're blowing up in Quake are rocket jumping around trying to blow you to bits also.

This game is going for a gritty, realistic look and outside of the police (who are trying to defend the town) it seems as though you are hunting down masses of innocents…

At least in my mind there is a difference between a competitive fantasy based shooter and a realistic mass-murder sim.
 

kick51

Banned
Nathan Drake kills people trying to kill him. They generally shoot first, and let's face it, none of these people are hired to do any good (like letting lose a swarm of sealed zombies, gaining the power of a tree, or hell, just using the powers of a lost city for some illusory bio-weapon). Hell, Drake goes out of his way to not kill innocents, as seen in UC2's first level.

Context is what separates defending yourself Indiana Jones style and being an Edgemaster 5000.

Edit: I'm not saying games like this can't exist, because then we'd go down a slippery slope of what's acceptable and what's not. But I can make fun of how overly edgey it's trying to be and how it reminds me of that kid in high school who just hated everyone.


If you think about the context of Uncharted for two seconds, you can easily pierce the justifications the game gives you on the surface.

The game starts out with Drake and Sully planning to go get treasure, so they go to the country of interest, and Drake shoots the place up (and Drake and Sully clap for themselves after.) Then, after the fact, the story turns into something supposedly bigger.

Anyone who knows anything about these kinds of mercs they kill knows that they're generally uneducated, impoverished people who don't have a choice like, say, go to medical school or be a merc. I'm sure some cold blooded killers are in there, but the justification in the game is actually "who will notice a couple thousand dead poor minorities in 3rd world countries, lets go get treasure." I don't care if it doesn't say it in explicit words, that's still what the gameplay is expressing.

The fact that this game says it outright is more like its blowing the cover on other video games.
 

JNT

Member
Too edgy for me. I think the timing feels wrong and the game just generally looks tasteless. To each their own though.

People from that thread about playing a serial killer should be happy.

This game seems to be about a spree killer, not a serial killer. And if you think this is bad, then a game about a serial killer would melt your face.
 

Frologic

Member
I guess I am not very thin skinned about this stuff... I've seen dozens of games that do this sort of thing over the years.

I feel like if everyone was wearing a turban in this game, no one would be flinching.

That's not a judgment... if this particular disturbs people, that's understandable, but it seems like a matter of degrees when comparing this to most other violent games, at best, to me.

Targeting a specific group of innocent people based on their culture or religion is even worse.

edit - Beaten
 

DSix

Banned
Seems like the worst shit attention-grabbing scheme I ever saw. Going for shock factor in an already desensitised media is just the worst.

Ugh... Some devs are really soulless morons. I can't fathom how anyone can work on such a project without feeling ill and requestioning oneself (and bin the project just as fast).
 

Unison

Member
Well for one Quake is a fantasy sci-fi setting, but more importantly I'm pretty sure the people you're blowing up in Quake are rocket jumping around trying to blow you to bits also.

This game is going for a gritty, realistic look and outside of the police (who are trying to defend the town) it seems as though you are hunting down masses of innocents…

At least in my mind there is a difference between a competitive fantasy based shooter and a realistic mass-murder sim.

It's all fantasy to me... This game hardly looks or feels real enough to be disturbing to me. A thin narrative pretext doesn't really absolve virtual bloodlust, so when it's removed, I don't care. I just own up to the fact that it feels satisfying to kill people in games sometimes.
 
Interesting. First Postal was intruguing because it aproached it's theme with straight face, while the two sequels went for farce

What was more odd to me is that I think Postal 2 generated more controversy than the original despite being more, er... "lighthearted" for the lack of a better term. Yeah this definitely takes from the original though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom