-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
The dissonance in RDR stemming from killing so many people is really getting to me
- Thread starter pa22word
- Start date
Compared to most modern shooters, Spec-Ops The Line was somewhat successful in merging narrative and gameplay because of its unique story approach that commented on those gameplay tropes.
AlimNassor
Banned
Thing is, why does it bother people so much a game tries to be a game while still having a plot? it's as if people truly want all games to be realistic. That's the attitude that's killing the industry. There was a time when games were games. RDR is an action game similar to the Dollars trilogy or any Clint Eastwood movie. In those movies he kills lots of people, yet those movies are viewed as classics.
It's not as if I'm killing innocent people, in Uncharted, RDR, and even TR the people you kill are bad men. Why am I supposed to feel remorse for someone that has no backstory, no family no character, and only exists to kill me? If they started giving enemies unique faces and even make them human with families, we'd have a problem. But, no, they're usually faceless men who want to kill you. If you surrender they'll shoot you. So why is it a bad and terrible thing to kill them?
It's not as if I'm killing innocent people, in Uncharted, RDR, and even TR the people you kill are bad men. Why am I supposed to feel remorse for someone that has no backstory, no family no character, and only exists to kill me? If they started giving enemies unique faces and even make them human with families, we'd have a problem. But, no, they're usually faceless men who want to kill you. If you surrender they'll shoot you. So why is it a bad and terrible thing to kill them?
No, that's an attidude that fuels progress in the industry.
The problem is the experience becomes incoherent and unpleasant when the parts don't fit together.
I'm not so sure about that. Most of the time you basically just assume they're bad and deserve to die because the crosshair turns red.
But he does. The whole game is basically about Marston wanting to leave behind his past as a killer.
rosaceadude2112
Member
As far as cover shooters go, Kane and Lynch 2 does it a lot better I think.(edit: read all about it in my dead thread!)
For games that actually avoid dissonance due to their gameplay, tactical shooters and stealth games are a better bet. SWAT 4 for instance.
dream
Member
But then isn't the impact of the story undermined by the incongruity that arises?
Ace Harding
Member
Except to do that and be reunited with his family he needs to hunt down his old gang, then
he himself is hunted, then Jack takes revenge
So really everything he needs to do, that he is motivated and driven to do, ultimately involve violence and killing.
It's not like he's just hanging out and wants to get a real job right away - he's been separated from his family, he can't sit idly or start a new life.
Can't really agree with that since The Line even comments on
how it is possible for 3 men to kill several hundreds of soldiers. Towards the end of the game even the enemies are in disbelief and downright terrified of you.
True. But that doesn't explain certain scenes. Example:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=56888962&postcount=90
Kageshinzo
Member
Then why doesn't it bother people when your character gets shot multiple times in a space of a minute and all he has to do is hide to regenerate health? If we're going for non-clashing of experience and having all parts fit together, then you should get shot once or twice and be incapacitated until you get medical help.
It's all because of gameplay. You're supposed to shut off the part of your brain when it comes to the shooting portion. They're bad guys, they're trying to kill you. You kill them first before they do. That's it. No moralizing on how despicable of a human being you are killing all these bad men. I mean, if people started thinking too much about the body count when Schwarnezegger went amok in Commando, then you're probably looking at the entertainment media the wrong way.
Rawket Lawnchair
Member
The people you're supposed to terminate, in most games, are people who are generally dangerous to the human environment around them, and who would kill anyone without remorse. Nathan and Max do not go on killing sprees against puppies or kittens or unarmed babies and children, they fight people armed to the teeth with similar weapons and with agendas of their own - Max's or Nate's deaths would be irrelevant to these people, they wouldn't commit suicide over killing someone. If you don't believe me, don't fight back in the next action sequence you play.
This all reminds me of the various arguments about "writing" in videogames and people feeling offended that certain curse words are used over and over again against people of different sexes, ethnicities, backgrounds - as if in real life all ghettoed criminals and gangsters have a PhD in Talking and do not use certain curse words at all.
Seriously, sometimes people just forget it's games we're talking about and the medium still tries to adapt in an ever-changing world. All games are kind of broken, all games can be exploited from different people for different reasons, all games age differently, and the same applies to books, movies, music etc, every form of art.
Unless you got into gaming during the last 5 years, you're supposed to know that. We mature as personalities and see things differently, but very few games managed to always be ahead of their time. Sure you can look at a photograph from long ago and nitpick every weird and stupid detail about it, but what's the point anymore?
This all reminds me of the various arguments about "writing" in videogames and people feeling offended that certain curse words are used over and over again against people of different sexes, ethnicities, backgrounds - as if in real life all ghettoed criminals and gangsters have a PhD in Talking and do not use certain curse words at all.
Seriously, sometimes people just forget it's games we're talking about and the medium still tries to adapt in an ever-changing world. All games are kind of broken, all games can be exploited from different people for different reasons, all games age differently, and the same applies to books, movies, music etc, every form of art.
Unless you got into gaming during the last 5 years, you're supposed to know that. We mature as personalities and see things differently, but very few games managed to always be ahead of their time. Sure you can look at a photograph from long ago and nitpick every weird and stupid detail about it, but what's the point anymore?
Banjo Tango
Member
Definitely agree with the OP.
Also, when you're floating down the river with Irish O'Stereotype and you've got five hundred people lying in ambush along either bank was pretty jarring.
Also, when you're floating down the river with Irish O'Stereotype and you've got five hundred people lying in ambush along either bank was pretty jarring.
rosaceadude2112
Member
Yeah I know I just think Spec Ops kinda stinks and Dog Days has maybe the best story this gen.
People do complain about auto-health-regeneration etc. but not to the same extent because:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=56887762&postcount=78
Shutting off the brain becomes more difficult as games are advancing as far as their narrative quality goes. Why do you think do these discussions arise only now and not already in the 80s and 90s? Hell, I'm under the impression that every single gaming podcast suddenly discusses this issue and it's become really prominent in gaming forums as well (Bioshock Infinite, Uncharted, Tomb Raider etc).
Many people are bothered by this feeling of dissonance and therefore it's a real issue.
I can't agree with this either.
But I do prefer K&L2 to any COD etc.
Count of Monte Sawed-Off
un33dab@dpu$$y
I agree somewhat. Playing through Red Dead, Uncharted, and Max Payne 3 every once in awhile the thought would enter my head that thought would enter my head. Wow, I sure am killing a fuck load of people. But in the end they're games based around that type of play, and I'm not sure there is a better alternative. If you have fewer enemies the games will be shorter, less challenging, and really not as fun to play. If you have fewer but tougher enemies you, you get bullet sponges and that would be even worse for trying to create a sense of realism. In the end it's just the nature of the beast.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
It doesn't bother me in particular, but I am fairly excited that this is a topic of conversation. I'm hoping the fact that it's brought up in regard to every video game made now will lead to less shootery shooting games next gen. Things like Bioshock Infinite that could've used about 50% less combat, for instance. Or an Uncharted with a premium on puzzle solving and less waist-high walls.
Rawket Lawnchair
Member
Not really, violence has always been an issue in videogames ever since I remember myself. Unless you forget, let's say, Carmageddon.
The only reason discussions are more heated and frequent now, is because of social media.
Ace Harding
Member
OP I know what you mean, I just don't think RDR is the best example. The one thing about it though, is it does actually make you identify more with Marston at times than GTA does with Nico. So I guess maybe that makes the dissonance worse?
We got stuff like "The Wild Bunch" (spoilers, I guess)
http://youtu.be/KJMxGFco57Y
Instead of stuff like this scene from Unforgiven:
http://youtu.be/Y5LkbZFfKx4
But they were going for spaghetti western and Peckinpah, and if you watch that scene I think you have to agree they nailed it.
We got stuff like "The Wild Bunch" (spoilers, I guess)
http://youtu.be/KJMxGFco57Y
Instead of stuff like this scene from Unforgiven:
http://youtu.be/Y5LkbZFfKx4
But they were going for spaghetti western and Peckinpah, and if you watch that scene I think you have to agree they nailed it.
Cyber Caesar
Member
When video games become capable of sentience, that's when we all should start to worry... Conservative predictions are around 2029. That's only 15 years away. 
This will be a form of murder.
This will be a form of murder.rosaceadude2112
Member
Commando doesn't really have any aspirations beyond letting Arnold kills tons of dudes. Red Dead Redemption attempts to act as a commentary on the hopelessness of the American dream, how the seat of power rigs the game against the common man, responsibility and a number of other things. It doesn't make sense to just turn your brain off for large portions of it when the rest is trying to be thought provoking.
Nope, it's because of better narratives and more life-like visuals. People didn't question their own actions when playing Tank on Atari 2600 or Cabal on Amiga. Now apparently many people do.
Not necessarily. I never felt a disconnect between the gameplay and the story in RDR largely because the setting lent itself well to frequent killing. John Marston isn't exactly a saint, he is perfectly willing to kill in the name of saving his family. Of course he wants to leave his bandit life behind, but he isn't the type of person to cry about dead people that got in his way. Maybe you would have a problem if you tried to ground the logistics of killing 200+ men in real life, but I don't doubt that if such a situation were possible that Marston would have handled the situation any differently.
Deified Data
Banned
GTA is an effigy of modern America, RDR is an effigy of the Old West. Try not to think about it too much.
Spat_triate
Member
I would fully agree with the OP if the population of the game world was set, and deaths of NPCs were final. At least that way there would be tangible visual feedback from the game creating the dissonance (the player could actually create a ghost town). For better or worse, as it stands, NPCs are spawned when needed and killing thousands has little or no consequence to the player.
rosaceadude2112
Member
I can't agree with this either.
But I do prefer K&L2 to any COD etc.
I just prefer it because Spec Ops' dialogue is too much like Nolan's Batman where it seems like every spoken word is just another rephrasing of the themes(incidentally RDR has this issue too). The characters become too one-note. Where Dog Days has interesting characterizations and aesthetics to communicate what it wants to, Spec Ops has an old man explaining what the story's about. Half-Life 2 and COD4 also contain more interesting commentaries on video game violence I feel.
And for the record on this topic, I love shooting tons of bad guys in games. I just don't like it when my gunstarts philosophising in between fights.
Banjo Tango
Member
In The Wild Bunch, everything built up to *that* scene... and once that scene was over, that was the end.
If The Wild Bunch was filled with violence of that scale it would lose a lot of the impact - and the bodycount would start to seem a little jarring for the movie's tone.
Granted, RDR is a LOT longer than a movie. But when they keep repeating these extinction-level events (that have none of the weight or consequence from The Wild Bunch) it's at odds with the game's depiction of the world.
Blow is absurd. There are countless good movies where this happens.
How many millions of soldiers through out history have come back home from killing families to take care of their own family? John is simply putting his family first.
I wonder if Blow would find Lincoln absurd for all the innocent lives and families murdered by Lincoln's Union Army. Would he argue that the means didn't justify the end?
Rawket Lawnchair
Member
Again, the same thing happened back in the 90s with the gradual transition in 3D - Carmageddon is a fine example, GTA3 in the 00s is also a fine example and both games generated a sort of uproar for their realism and the vile actions you had to perform. The games you mention are either 2D or pseudo-3D, and quite repetitive, hence not very relevant in a 3D world.
If you're overlooking the influence of social media (and the huge dimensions things can take in the internet), you're doing it wrong.
That thought crossed my mind as well earlier. What if the guy I just shot was a vendor who is now gone forever? Dark Souls did it in rudimentary fashion and on a small scale with its NPCs who could turn on you and be killed. Doing the same in a game like RDR - and for every possible enemy - is surely pretty much impossible for budget reasons. Maybe it can be accomplished at some point in the future with standardized dynamic AI routines for such purposes.
Definitely not to this degree. Back then it was always about the bloody depictions of violence, not about the implications of killing or narrative vs gameplay. Again, people didn't question their actions in those games (well, maybe some started to with games like GTA3 etc).
ShockingAlberto
Member
I have huge issues with RDR's dissonance but it is not simply from killing people.
I am willing to buy that Marsten is willing to kill bad guys to save his family. If that were the entire game, I'd be okay with it.
But the mechanics outside of story missions basically say "Hey, this Marsten is whoever you make him to be." Save people or walk past them? Right wrongs or contribute? Shoot up a town and take everything of value or win your money at the table? You begin cultivating a character that, depending on which direction you took him, could be completely at odds with the Marsten in the story. The John Marsten that saved a man from hanging because of his pleas would not have helped people capture and rape a village, but the John Marsten that Rockstar wrote would.
It is a problem that, at the time, was unique to Red Dead Redemption. Niko Bellic could still be a revenge-driven psychopath whether or not he bought a tuxedo to look nice. You can't make a Shepard that doesn't want to bring Saren to justice, he'll just either be a doormat or rude about it. Even the most murderous Vault Kid still got along with his father and wanted to help pursue his work because you're given no indication he wouldn't think that way. You can establish a narrative for John Marsten that makes his actions (or inaction) in the story terrible.
It contributed a lot to the overall mixed feelings I had when I finished the game. I didn't feel that the character I was playing was the character I was seeing and it impacted a lot of how I felt about the late game stuff.
I am willing to buy that Marsten is willing to kill bad guys to save his family. If that were the entire game, I'd be okay with it.
But the mechanics outside of story missions basically say "Hey, this Marsten is whoever you make him to be." Save people or walk past them? Right wrongs or contribute? Shoot up a town and take everything of value or win your money at the table? You begin cultivating a character that, depending on which direction you took him, could be completely at odds with the Marsten in the story. The John Marsten that saved a man from hanging because of his pleas would not have helped people capture and rape a village, but the John Marsten that Rockstar wrote would.
It is a problem that, at the time, was unique to Red Dead Redemption. Niko Bellic could still be a revenge-driven psychopath whether or not he bought a tuxedo to look nice. You can't make a Shepard that doesn't want to bring Saren to justice, he'll just either be a doormat or rude about it. Even the most murderous Vault Kid still got along with his father and wanted to help pursue his work because you're given no indication he wouldn't think that way. You can establish a narrative for John Marsten that makes his actions (or inaction) in the story terrible.
It contributed a lot to the overall mixed feelings I had when I finished the game. I didn't feel that the character I was playing was the character I was seeing and it impacted a lot of how I felt about the late game stuff.
Kageshinzo
Member
There are a lot of things to criticize in a video game: quality of writing, god-awful VA, broken gameplay mechanics, fun factor, etc. The number of bad guys you kill and the morality of your actions doing so is not among them.
Point missed.
If it bothers them and hurts their experience with the game, the criticism is valid. Period.
If this issue doesn't bother you, good for you. Just ignore the thread but don't tell others what they should be criticizing. That goes for all the "shut off your brain","don't think about it","go play an indie game, hipster!"-commenters.
Kenshin001
Member
John Marston = psychopathic mass murderer.
I'd heard there was a trophy where you had to kill a certain amount of people until you got an alert and then survive through that. I didn't realise it was a MP trophy though, so I sat on top of the building with the gatling gun and kept killing everyone and everything that entered the town. Must have killed hundreds of innocent people before I gave up.
I'd heard there was a trophy where you had to kill a certain amount of people until you got an alert and then survive through that. I didn't realise it was a MP trophy though, so I sat on top of the building with the gatling gun and kept killing everyone and everything that entered the town. Must have killed hundreds of innocent people before I gave up.
entremet
Member
The reason we bring it up is because it is brought in the game! In Uncharted 2. Series is very self aware.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Why?
Kageshinzo
Member
Because it's a game. Outside of any game's established narrative, the concept is simple: bad guys are out to get you. You get them first or otherwise, it's game over. The only dissonance you should feel is if the actions of the character you're controlling conflicts entirely with how he or she is presented in a narrative, and if such presentation causes the whole narrative/story/plot to not make a goddamn sense.
The only times that killing in games annoys me in regards to the story is when the main character is freaked out the first time they do it and then quickly become a killing machine (Ex. Far Cry 3, Tomb Raider). RDR makes it very clear that Marston is not unfamiliar with killing and frames it as something he needs to do for his family. He's reluctant but not incapable. I do agree that the body count in Mexico gets a bit ridiculous but it those missions being framed as a
made it a little easier for me to take.
revolution
ShockingAlberto
Member
This is not a constant and we're not going to get any of the games that challenge that idea if we, ourselves, do not challenge that idea.
Exclamation-One
Member
LOL, no.
------------------------------------
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
Blondie (Eastwood): 11
Tuco (Wallach): 6
Angel Eyes (Van Cleef): 3
A Fistful of Dollars
Joe (Eastwood): 18 (2 animated)
Ramon (Volonte): 50
For a Few Dollars More
Monco (Eastwood): 12
El Indio (Volonte): 7
Colonel Mortimer (Van Cleef): 6
Source: www.moviebodycounts.com
------------------------------------
In RDR, your killing is completely disproportionate.
Although I was able to more or less separate the narrative from the gameplay, Jon Blow is totally right.
Hell, I honestly was shocked when Marston gunned down three drunk banditos in Mexico, because I'd been playing him as completely straight as possible. I even wanted to have (spoilers)
Jack Marston wound but spare Ross in the endgame to end the cycle of violence.
If Rockstar wants to make a truly immersive Red Dead game, they could certainly benefit from having less killing. That said, I don't have a problem with high body counts, per se. I'm looking forward to wanton destruction in GTA V because of the cartoonish approach to violence in the world.
MoGamesXNA
Unconfirmed Member
It does. I was indicating that I have a limited ability empathise with these kinds opinions.
From a game design standpoint, how would you redesign RDR to make it more palatable to your available levels of escapism?
Portugeezer
Member
Riding horses with pretty lady cowboys... what, not the most fun mission?
Hargenx
Member
2 hours movie against a 30 hours game, looks fair enough to me.
keltickennedy
Member
More like the vocal minority...
If you are having trouble killing virtual characters at this point in the game, than yes, I would recommend you stop playing.
Luminous_Reaver
Neo Member
I don't know if you've been paying attention, but narrative quality and focus has gone up since the eighties. It's for this reason that killing hundreds in video games is being reflected upon in a different light.