-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
What was the first game you actually found morally objectionable?
- Thread starter onken
- Start date
Madden 2008 for Wii.
Madden 2007 for Wii was a fully featured Madden game of the 00s: realistic graphics, full playbooks, create a team, create a player, create a play, and create a playbook all fully integrated with franchise mode. It even had an interesting (if divisive) superstar mode with first person FOV.
Then in Madden 2008 they released a horrifyingly threadbare edition. Of all the bugs and missing features, this is my favorite: all players are the same height. EA's official response is that this is due to "disc size limitations."
In future years they would try to kiddify the graphics to make up for the lack of features (09), or quietly restore some features and hype them as if they were new. But 2008 was really the year EA showed their true colors.
The Madden series was the harbinger of EA's future malfeasance. If only more gamers were paying attention then, perhaps future tragedies could have been avoided.
Madden 2007 for Wii was a fully featured Madden game of the 00s: realistic graphics, full playbooks, create a team, create a player, create a play, and create a playbook all fully integrated with franchise mode. It even had an interesting (if divisive) superstar mode with first person FOV.
Then in Madden 2008 they released a horrifyingly threadbare edition. Of all the bugs and missing features, this is my favorite: all players are the same height. EA's official response is that this is due to "disc size limitations."
In future years they would try to kiddify the graphics to make up for the lack of features (09), or quietly restore some features and hype them as if they were new. But 2008 was really the year EA showed their true colors.
The Madden series was the harbinger of EA's future malfeasance. If only more gamers were paying attention then, perhaps future tragedies could have been avoided.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Sort of. Not really but kind of. Violence and murder, while ostensibly the greatest of crimes, is contextualized in our culture in a large number of ways and is something inherent in almost all of us (we've all at least felt the urge to punch someone before). The Manhunt series is on the very edge of even "acceptable" violence which gives it some degree of artistic merit even if its also seemingly psychopathic. The difference might be that we're further along as a culture in recognizing violence and murder and so its safer to explore, whereas all of our baggage around sexual assault including how much difficulty we often has recognizing that its happened makes anything that seems like its providing the player with an indulgent experience of sexual assault more objectionable.
Jim Sterling had a pretty great episode on this general conflict
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/5972-Rape-vs-Murder
I'm not saying it does, that's up to the individual's personal opinion and interpretation. You think it doesn't add to the narrative for reasons, while someone could argue the opposite and hold the opinion that it fleshes out geralt's character because of their own reasons and interpretation. Maybe it's a representation of the memory geralt has, or maybe geralt's just a womanizing piece of shit with a distorted view which the cards represent, maybe it's a silly thing thrown in at the last second because of budget and time constraints and they weren't able to do what they wanted to do. I don't know, but saying the creators are sexist because it makes you uncomfortable seems silly. It makes me cringe as well, but that's outside the discussion of the creators harboring ill feelings toward women. It strikes me as laziness more than anything, but whatever.
joeygreco1985
Member
The "No Russian" mission in Modern Warfare 2 where you shoot up an airport made me feel really uneasy when I played he game at the time.
When my little cousin in grade 4 played the game at his house, it disturbed the hell out of me. Kids shouldn't see that shit, man. Wish his parents didn't buy it for him.
When my little cousin in grade 4 played the game at his house, it disturbed the hell out of me. Kids shouldn't see that shit, man. Wish his parents didn't buy it for him.
Deified Data
Banned
I think that's a pretty flimsy interpretation, but if it's one someone wants to cling to it for whatever reason (over the much more likely explanation I offered), more power to them. I'd be more than happy to disagree with them and explain to them why, too, but I don't think that's going to be happening in this conversation. Personally I don't think some of the writing found in The Witcher could come from someone with a healthy attitude towards women, but as you say, that's my opinion and I'm comfortable with that. My very likely true opinion based on common sense and basic observational skills.
All this returns to my initial point: it's the first game I played that I morally balked at. That is also an opinion. I'm not suggesting CDPR pussyfoot around the issue, just that they shouldn't be surprised when someone complains.
The Iron Yuppie
Member
I'm with OP here. I was super excited for MvC3, bought the collectors edition, and then lo and behold they want to hit me up for another $40 disc for shit that could easily be DLC.
Probably Soldier of Fortune - the devs were clearly pursuing goreporn for no other reason than they thought it would sell more.
Manhunt too.
While I appreciate the satire level I've always been uneasy about the whole "kill the hooker to get your money back" angle in GTA.
Of course these are weak sauce next to stuff like Rapelay and the like which really are quite creepy and disturbing to judge from the available info on them.
Manhunt too.
While I appreciate the satire level I've always been uneasy about the whole "kill the hooker to get your money back" angle in GTA.
Of course these are weak sauce next to stuff like Rapelay and the like which really are quite creepy and disturbing to judge from the available info on them.
SeventhSon
Member
The DLC Salesman inside Dragon Age Origins offended me greatly.
soulassssns
Banned
Same here.
killatopak
Member
GTA was really morally bad but I could somehow tolerate it.
COD MW where you kill civilians in the airport was really bad too.
COD MW where you kill civilians in the airport was really bad too.
Barry Burton
Member
You and Jim raise very good points but I see the reason elsewhere. The act of rape is political in a sense that murder rarely is: a rapist disrespects the very fabric of our communal life (not just a maybe honorable man), a system heavily relying on honor by means of the exchange of "pristine" women; he not only devalues a commodity (her chastity) in maybe great demand, he gravely diminishes the overall pool everyone draws from; there's now almost nothing to be gained from having her/giving her. The intense actual mental and physical damage done to the victim is of comparatively little concern to people fervently asking for a rapist to be tortured, then lynched.
Things are much more subtle and/or sophisticated these days, but that line of thinking is still very present. People will much rather tolerate disrespect towards the male members of their family than towards the female members (just think of the popularity and effectiveness of mom jokes), but not because they think more highly of the latter, quite the opposite. If you call somebody's mother (or sister) a "whore", to take a drastic example, you raise the honor of the entire family (or its capital in the case of an unmarried sister) to question; the males and their honor are represented by their women (whom we narrowly watch showing chastity, raising the children, adorning the house and their husbands, covering their backs, caring for guests, easing discord, appealing for charity etc.). It might be another reason why promiscuous men are accepted while promiscuous women rarely are; if a woman is (seemingly) available to all, she can't be given/owned. And here the rapist figures in: he, too, treats women as available to all.
That's what we can't tolerate, the harm to our way of thinking, not that to the victim, that's mainly a rationalization. We aren't necessarily showing great insight into the complexities of ethics if rape seems worse to us than murder. We hardly differentiate between a rape victim and a women in control of her sexuality; they're valuable things. It's quite disturbing.
I find the stories of the later COD/MOH and similar morally objectionable, in that you play as part of massively superior force destroying enemies with genuine grievances and little or no way to fight back. The I also consider ultranationlism morally objectionable, so add that to the list for that sort of games
CambriaRising
Member
Not much that I've actually played.
I suppose the first one that made me turn my head in disgust was hearing about RapeLay years ago. There have been plenty since then, including a game whose discussion is now banned on this board.
I suppose the first one that made me turn my head in disgust was hearing about RapeLay years ago. There have been plenty since then, including a game whose discussion is now banned on this board.
As I play Monster Hunter, and I'm maiming animals, smashing beaks, cutting tails off and breaking bones....it's actually starting to feel a little awkward to be honest. Seeing a creature limp away in pain desperate for its life.
Same for pokemon. Didnt feel it during red/blue. X is the first one I've played since then and capturing small animals and forcing them to scratch, whip and fireball each other certainly doesn't seem very child friendly.
Same for pokemon. Didnt feel it during red/blue. X is the first one I've played since then and capturing small animals and forcing them to scratch, whip and fireball each other certainly doesn't seem very child friendly.
useyourfist
Member
Final fantasy xiii-2 the casino mini game table telling me it is unlockable through dlc...oh how square have fallen. 
AmaterasuOni
Banned
No, I just don't live in USA. We didn't have any of that here in Finland.
first one??... ok.
keep in mind that I was VERY young... but killing Mario at the end of Donkey Kong Jr. left a really strong impression on me.
I didn't just "knocked him up" or anything like that... I killed him... YOU KILL MARIO ON THAT GAME!!!... you can see the little halo over his head. At that point, I've already played the first DK and several mario games, so, killing a "hero" felt very wrong for some reason.
keep in mind that I was VERY young... but killing Mario at the end of Donkey Kong Jr. left a really strong impression on me.
I didn't just "knocked him up" or anything like that... I killed him... YOU KILL MARIO ON THAT GAME!!!... you can see the little halo over his head. At that point, I've already played the first DK and several mario games, so, killing a "hero" felt very wrong for some reason.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
Must have been some loli garbage.
JimmyRustler
Member
Not many but GTAV just rubbed me the wrong way. It is a great game but playing as Trevor was just not fun at all. Don't make me play a psycho and for the love of god don't make
interactive. I put the game down for a few days after that sick shit. Don't care if it's satirical or not, I don't want to be forced to do that in a game.
torture scenes
dcx4610
Member
I remember thinking Mahunt was "too much" when it came out. It just felt violent for the sake of being violent.
When the new Mortal Kombat came out, for some reason I felt repulsed with the fatalities. I loved MK1 and 2 in my teens and thought the violence was cool.
As an adult, I've seen real violence now thanks to the internet and news and know how the world works. I don't want violence glorified, treated lightly or done for coolness factor anymore. It just seems wrong. At least extreme gore like that.
When the new Mortal Kombat came out, for some reason I felt repulsed with the fatalities. I loved MK1 and 2 in my teens and thought the violence was cool.
As an adult, I've seen real violence now thanks to the internet and news and know how the world works. I don't want violence glorified, treated lightly or done for coolness factor anymore. It just seems wrong. At least extreme gore like that.
It's not even out yet
DJ_Lae
Member
I love me some violence but there were definitely moments in the third game where I felt a bit uncomfortable with the way it was handled and how it lingered.
Maybe it just never bothered me in the older games because it didn't look as realistic.
I'm actually on the third game for the first time now and there are a few scenes that I know about but haven't reached yet that I'm dreading.
Primarily Helios, from what I can remember.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
Fuck that game and any other "gamer" that supports that disgusting trash.
I feel it's way more simple than all of that.
We have a very broad conceptualization of violence and interpret it without relating so heavily as behavior. An anvil can fall on wily coyote and i might laugh. I can strangle a person in a game and the motives are simple and interpretted away.
Now if I in a game grope and rape someone, the experience is personal and I ask why. I'm much closer to hurting people I know now. The only way this is a game is because of how personal it is. It reflects me and my relationships, not a general course of action.
groping games are way worse than murder games. They are enjoyed because they play on your personal relationships and not broad simple manifestations of feelings.
This might be harder to argue in airtight legal language, but I find it shocking that it isn't plain and obvious that there is an extreme difference between killing as a game mechanic and rape/grope/torture/etc. as fun.
Pretty much agree with this post. As long as it is fiction, I'm not morally outraged.
Indeed. Games, any form of media, with lolita content disturb me.
I don't think i've ever been morally objectional at any game. I just see it as a game nothing more nothing less. However kids playing 18 rated games isn't right and parents buying games for them are equally to blame thats the only moral thing i see that is to be outraged about.
Content wise? Nothing. Stuff that other people find offensive I just find dumb, since a lot of the time it exists for no reason other than to offend people. Super Columbine Massacre isn't an intelligent critique of anything, it is piss christ as a game.
Business wise? Many of the things that get discussed here each and every day.
Business wise? Many of the things that get discussed here each and every day.
Content-wise: GTA5. You roleplay as not one but three giant assholes.
Business-wise: Want The Real Ending To Asura's Wrath? Cough Up $6.99. FFXIII-2's Requiem of the Goddess is almost as bad, just $4 cheaper.
Business-wise: Want The Real Ending To Asura's Wrath? Cough Up $6.99. FFXIII-2's Requiem of the Goddess is almost as bad, just $4 cheaper.
chrominance
Member
I don't know if this is really the first--there are plenty of Japanese games I probably will never play because I don't agree with the sexual content--but the one that sticks out in recent memory is Duke Nukem Forever. There's a whole section where you walk through some alien-infested area with naked, cocooned women hanging from the walls. The women all cry out in something that's half despair, half orgasm. And, of course, their breasts are on full display. The worst, though, is that the women are actually destructible items in the environment, so you can catch them in crossfire or an explosion and they'll burst. Duke might even have some witty dialogue when this happens.
It's actually pretty horrifying, and the only thing that keeps it from being disgusting on a deep, nauseating level is that the whole thing is so absurdly juvenile that you can't figure out how anyone thought to greenlight this level. Like, the rest of the game doesn't exactly treat women very well either, but this was something else entirely.
It's actually pretty horrifying, and the only thing that keeps it from being disgusting on a deep, nauseating level is that the whole thing is so absurdly juvenile that you can't figure out how anyone thought to greenlight this level. Like, the rest of the game doesn't exactly treat women very well either, but this was something else entirely.
onken
Member
In the Japanese version they switch him out for a zombie - I never knew about this until i played the remaster years later.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
You see, I never took it like that. To me, it came across as a harrowing critique of video game violence and our part in it, all wrapped in a grimy John Carpenter style.
I've never had the kind of conflicted feelings I had with Manhunt with any other game and I think that was intentional on R*'s part. I really valued the experience.
That's understandable. Although, what were you expecting?
I don't really take moral issue with content. Business practices on the other hand...
While I can't really recall the first game I took issue with, the new SimCity is the one that made me stand up, wipe my hands, and say "enough." It was SimCity that made me stop caring about the majority of DLC, cancel extraneous services I was paying for (even non-game related ones), turn a blind eye to most F2P, and even stop buying AAA games on day one. Something snapped in my head and I just wanted nothing to do with this garbage anymore.
SimCity was a shell of SimCity 4, was a broken game both in terms of technology and the game rules itself, and it offered cynical game-breaking DLC (that Nissan Leaf Station was ridiculous) That's on top of the regular AAA shenanigans like review embargoes.
The icing on the cake was being treated like an imbecile and told that the overbearing network tech was absolutely required in order to make the game work.
Because of SimCity, I can't even be excited for a new game in a AAA franchise I might love anymore. I simply wait, play it somehow at some point in the future, and if I like it, buy it at 50% of the day one asking price.
While I can't really recall the first game I took issue with, the new SimCity is the one that made me stand up, wipe my hands, and say "enough." It was SimCity that made me stop caring about the majority of DLC, cancel extraneous services I was paying for (even non-game related ones), turn a blind eye to most F2P, and even stop buying AAA games on day one. Something snapped in my head and I just wanted nothing to do with this garbage anymore.
SimCity was a shell of SimCity 4, was a broken game both in terms of technology and the game rules itself, and it offered cynical game-breaking DLC (that Nissan Leaf Station was ridiculous) That's on top of the regular AAA shenanigans like review embargoes.
The icing on the cake was being treated like an imbecile and told that the overbearing network tech was absolutely required in order to make the game work.
Because of SimCity, I can't even be excited for a new game in a AAA franchise I might love anymore. I simply wait, play it somehow at some point in the future, and if I like it, buy it at 50% of the day one asking price.
KyanMehwulfe
Member
First and maybe only time I've felt empathy was Soldier of Fortune 2 after sneaking into that Latin American mansion through the roof, and cutting the throat of a main without thinking as she surprised me in the first room to keep her silent. She sort of looked blankly and gurgled for air out her throat, and it gave me pause in a way that I don't know if any other video game has. I play a lot of shooters and GTA since the PSX, and never really felt empathy -- or at least haunting empathy. I never feel the gameplay is actually objectionable. But in SOF2, whenever I replayed that area, I tried not to kill her again because I did feel I just personally rather not see her killed.
First time I ever change my gameplay based on the morality of a game character was probably GTA V, oddly enough. I think it's the contrast of Michael being sort of the anti-GTA character and Trevor being GTA personified, when I play GTA V (and I've replayed it 5 times now), I feel morally objectionable to committing unnecessary crimes and violence as Michael, and Franklin for the most part, because I just feel a sense of dissonance with the morality of those characters. In contrast, Trevor is a maniac and it makes perfect sense.
First time I ever change my gameplay based on the morality of a game character was probably GTA V, oddly enough. I think it's the contrast of Michael being sort of the anti-GTA character and Trevor being GTA personified, when I play GTA V (and I've replayed it 5 times now), I feel morally objectionable to committing unnecessary crimes and violence as Michael, and Franklin for the most part, because I just feel a sense of dissonance with the morality of those characters. In contrast, Trevor is a maniac and it makes perfect sense.
IdreamofHIME
Member
25 years gaming, yet to happen.
The airport massacre in MW2 was laughable. I am not opposed to depicting that scale of violence in any medium, period, as long as it serves a purpose. The airport sequence in MW2, however, was nonsensical, pointless, and indulgent. Within the context of the game, it makes no sense. If your writers can't be bothered to tell a cohesive and thoughtful narrative, don't put that shit in your game.
Pyramid head
Banned
God of War III.
I got the impression that Santa Monica wanted me to be cheering Kratos on in his righteous quest for vengeance but all I could think about was what a reprehensible piece of shit this character was that I'm controlling, and how much I didn't want him to succeed in his genocidal hissy fit.
I got the impression that Santa Monica wanted me to be cheering Kratos on in his righteous quest for vengeance but all I could think about was what a reprehensible piece of shit this character was that I'm controlling, and how much I didn't want him to succeed in his genocidal hissy fit.
Similar threads
- Poll