And also the fact that they attack him on sight with intent to kill. But let's ignore that for the sake of your argument.Drake's motivated by money and a sense of "adventure" to kill hundreds...
Which one is the psycho again?
And also the fact that they attack him on sight with intent to kill. But let's ignore that for the sake of your argument.Drake's motivated by money and a sense of "adventure" to kill hundreds...
Which one is the psycho again?
All people in Manhunt were criminals, who kinda were actors in some snuff movie for a crazy rich guy. Manhunt 2 also had a justification for killing that I don't want to spoil here. We'll see if there is one for this game here.
You aren't listening at all. There is NO narrative context to killing civilians in Fallout 3, and it's not encouraged. It's optional, but not at all required or encouraged. That is NOT AT ALL the same as a game predicated on the slaughter of innocent civilians. Same with Hotline Miami, in which you are killing mobsters (and, yes police, whom I believe are corrupt if I recall correct.) Difference between Hatred and Hotline Miami is that HM actually said something interesting about the violence in it, whereas (as far as we can tell at this time) this is just a civilian killing sim with nothing to say.
And if you want to completely remove the difference between civilians and hostile enemies for the sake of your argument, then you must have a hard time finding games you find acceptable.
Drake's motivated by money and a sense of "adventure" to kill hundreds...
Which one is the psycho again?
Yeah, with Manhunt it is still fucked up (like, the kill animations and how it glorified them) but there was context in the world.
Same with Hotline Miami, it had context for the killing (and was still fucked up though a fun and challenging game). No Russian in MW2 had context and also didn't actually need you to fire a single bullet.
In GTA the main goal isn't to kill random civilians, it's just something people do because they think it's fun. The main goal is to rise up in a criminal empire. That usually involves a lot of violence, mainly against cops and rival gang members and criminals but it has context and the part where you go on murder sprees in the streets killing unarmed civilians isn't the main part, just something you can do.
Here, the main part is the killing of civilians that can't defend themselves.
This is so stupid I have to interject. How can you compare Uncharted to this?
It's the way the narrative is framed that is a blindingly obvious, massive difference between the games.
This is the synopsis of this game:
So if you had a kid, or anyone, playing this, your mindset is going to be different. Because of the way the story is laid out, you are meant to be relishing in the slaughter of innocent people in gruesome ways.
This will obviously make what you think as you play completely different to Uncharted, where the narrative is you saving the day in some big adventure. Your actions aren't framed around slaughtering innocent people to notch up points.
Again, a thin layer of narrative context is just that... It doesn't really justify games that are largely predicated on mass murder to me.
Whatever helps you sleep at night, I guess.
To me this is in the same ballpark as dozens of other popular games. Hotline Miami would be another one to consider as a point of comparison, as that also has you playing a psychopathic mass murderer.
IIRC, Manhunt also had a layer of narrative context that contextualized everything: you were captured and set free in a fake city with people who were paid to kill you. It was kill or be killed.Rockstar also published Manhunt, which had similar kill cut scenes...
I guess that they were "enemy gang members" is supposed to make all the difference?
If you play FO3 with the sole purpose of RPing a mass murder who specifically targets unarmed civilians, that's good for you, I guess, but not really the point of the game.
Hotline Miami is also different because of its narrative context. You're right in that it's an incredibly brutal game. But you're not killing unarmed civilians, you're killing members of an organized crime syndicate. You do kill police in the game too, but IIRC, it's something you can either do when you're escaping or not. There's a level set in a police station but the narrative context attempts to justify this.
Hotline Miami is also not presented in such high fidelity. Its pixel art style (during gameplay, not the character portraits in story bits) means you can't see people's faces when you're doing something like smashing their heads against a wall. You also can't ever hear/read characters speaking during gameplay (nor do they do things like beg for their lives), so the fidelity of the simulation is much lower than something like Hatred. The game doesn't even have dialogue that's spoken aloud, it's all text.
IIRC, Manhunt also had a layer of narrative context that contextualized everything: you were captured and set free in a fake city with people who were paid to kill you. It was kill or be killed.
Well, that was unexpected.
This is one of those rare occasions that I though that this game deserves AO rating and that it would probably not be certified to appear on PS4/Xbone. Trailer just became more and more and more violent and genocidal as it went on, pretty disturbing.
It doesn't look special is all I was getting at. These games rarely interest me usually so that probably explains my off non relevant comment. You're right though solid doesn't mean novel or anything. My bad.Not tying to be rude but what is your point? Solid =/= novel/innovative
You are right, I don't have to consume it and I won't. Doesn't mean we can't talk about. Also if you read the thread barely anyone, heck no one is saying censor the game.The brilliant thing about media is that you have a choice of whether you consume it or not and whether you enjoy it or not.
Too often I feel like as a community we get our torches and pitchforks out about things and force developers into self censoring.
This is so stupid I have to interject. How can you compare Uncharted to this?
It's the way the narrative is framed that is a blindingly obvious, massive difference between the games.
This is the synopsis of this game:
So if you are a kid, or anyone, playing this, your mindset is going to be different as you play. Because of the way the story is laid out, you are meant to be relishing in the slaughter of innocent people in gruesome ways. And that is harmful.
This will obviously make what you are thinking as you play completely different to your thoughts as you play Uncharted, where the narrative is you saving the day in some big adventure. Your actions aren't framed around slaughtering innocent people to notch up points.
Rockstar also published Manhunt, which had similar kill cut scenes...
I guess that they were "enemy gang members" is supposed to make all the difference?
What's all this about there being no "context" to justify the violence? Sure there's a context, a story, it's there in the first half of the trailer. You just don't like it.
The guy who keeps warping the narrative to suit his needs.
I don't like being told what to think. I analyze games as they appear to me, not how the developer chooses to summarize them. Nathan Drake doesn't "save the day", he murders hundreds of people and destroys irreplaceable ruins and artifacts. Every god damn game ends with an ancient city collapsing into the void. He's a selfish opportunist and a misogynist to boot.
This is pretty metal. If the dude was into the occult it would be icing on the cake.
Poland, I think.It looks pretty black metal imo. Also, are the creators from Sweden or Norway? (only a point because black metal is popular/originated there). The CEO in the employee bio section is wearing a black metal shirt as well (can't make out the band).
They want to make something vulgar for their first game. That's their choice. Its just not for me.
Like I said, just like Indiana Jones. Do you have a problem with him as well?
I don't like being told what to think. I analyze games as they appear to me, not how the developer chooses to summarize them. Nathan Drake doesn't "save the day", he murders hundreds of people and destroys irreplaceable ruins and artifacts. Every god damn game ends with an ancient city collapsing into the void. He's a selfish opportunist and a misogynist to boot.
I haven't played Hatred, so I can't judge it yet like some others here, but I doubt it will be any worse than the other mass murder simulators I've played. Payday, Uncharted, GTA, Fallout, Call of "Duty", etc etc
Here's a question: If you have a problem with this game do you have a problem GTA V too? How about Hotline miami? In GTA V you straight up torture a dude and in Hotline miami you kill a bunch of cops in the most brutal manner.
hmmm ??
I looked at the screenshots first and thought, wow nice old school view, great art direction....
THEN I saw the Trailer
SERIOUSLY ....AS A GAME DEVELOPER MYSELF I FIND THIS DISTURBING....
Where are the limits ....JESUS!
Poland, I think.
Nobody is disputing the fact that there is narrative context, we're disputing the idea that this narrative context that requires you to murder civilians is somehow akin to the player's choice to murder civilians in games like Fallout 3 and GTA.What's all this about there being no "context" to justify the violence? Sure there's a context, a story, it's there in the first half of the trailer. You just don't like it.
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.
The press is going to have a field day with this. Why can't the developers just use zombies or aliens as the enemies to avoid all the inevitable bad press? Graphically, it looks like a step up from previous engines, though, that's for sure.
I think they want bad press. It's free advertising. They are trying to be like Rockstar.The press is going to have a field day with this. Why can't the developers just use zombies or aliens as the enemies to avoid all the inevitable bad press? Graphically, it looks like a step up from previous engines, though, that's for sure.
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.
Rockstar also published Manhunt, which had similar kill cut scenes...
I guess that they were "enemy gang members" is supposed to make all the difference?
People arguing for this game are making an awful lot of concessions. By your very own diatribe you would insist that Snuff films have as much integrity as The Godfather. It's a stupid stance to take and you're not really convincing anyone. Like I've already said, it's fine to stand up to censorship, but to take ridiculous stances in anticipation of such talk only serves to discredit your opinion on the art of games. Your stance becomes a profession of poor taste. If that's really the case, then fine. Enjoy your shitty games.
People arguing for this game are making an awful lot of concessions. By your very own diatribe you would insist that Snuff films have as much integrity as The Godfather. It's a stupid stance to take and you're not really convincing anyone. Like I've already said, it's fine to stand up to censorship, but to take ridiculous stances in anticipation of such talk only serves to discredit your opinion on the art of games. Your stance becomes a profession of poor taste. If that's really the case, then fine. Enjoy your shitty games.