'Ultraviolence' In Games Going Too Far

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
According to Warren Spector, the ultraviolence in games has to stop. Ahhh, I see now, that's why he went from making Deus Ex to games like Epic Mickey. :rolleyes:

"We've gone too far," he said. "The slow-motion blood spurts, the impalement by deadly assassins, the knives, shoulders, elbows to the throat. You know, Deus Ex had its moments of violence, but they were designed - whether they succeeded or not I can't say - but they were designed to make you uncomfortable, and I don't see that happening now."
Click to expand...
 
Well, where would HE draw this line?

... I'm serious. I can't follow the link. Does he clarify where said line is?
 
uncomfortable....really? I though Deus Ex was a rather tame game. I gues he must have been living under a rock for the pas few years.
 
I can understand this, I remember blood spurts being cool in mortal combat. I remember gibs being cool in UT99. But now, it's like "oh did someone get ripped in half? *shrug* I didn't notice." It was probably the default death animation anyways.


shifty68 said:
uncomfortable....really? I though Deus Ex was a rather tame game. I gues he must have been living under a rock for the pas few years.
Click to expand...

I think he meant the original released in 2000, as compared to games of that time.
 
Ultraviolence? Really? Ultraviolence to me would be some Hostel type shit where I can take an enemy out with a blowtorch to the eyes, or make them suffer by slowing cutting them.
 
A few eweks ago some freak ate a homeless guys face.
Why don't we focus on REAL violence first, then pick on video games after that.

Although I will say that Angry Birds is pretty fucking violent.
 
I wish they would just shut the fuck about violence in games. All this ignorance is what makes me want to be violent, not god damn video games. Fucking douche nozzles.
 
Seeing as all of the above horrible things in video games have been in the movie industry for decades, I fail to see the problem unless he is worried about all the people under the advertised "on box" age limit playing the game which is not the entertainment industries fault just $#!t parenting skills, or a store owners lack of giving two f#@ks, as long as they get their money.
 
Personally I think games don't have enough violence/gore these days. Let's get back to Soldier of Fortune 2-level gore!
 
Yeah we all know people like Jeffrey Dahmer and Timothy Mcveigh just love their violent video games.......wait they didn't play video games.....But they were both in the military so I guess would could draw a connection and ban all military activities.
 
As opposed to what? Do people understand that while video games are violent, the stuff people do in real life is 10x worse? When was the last time you saw a person eat someones face due to the result of cocaine psychosis? Or a mother who cooked her baby and ate it cause Satan told her too? If anything they're zombies in video games. These people make GTA look like Care Bears.

Also the Hunger Games book had a part where it portrays exploding baby limbs, and it was a #1 seller. So books aren't any better. At what point do we begin to blame genetics and parenting for the results of violent people? You know it's true, but people don't wanna admit it. They're just shifting the blame around to other people.

Also wanna point out people in Big Bang show. Yea it's a stereo type of nerds, but they play an insane amount of games and yet have no ounce of violent behavior among them. Cause they're nerds. You have to admit that some personalities are more prone to violent behavior then others. This is a generalization, but so is assuming that video games lead to violence.
 
Hey, Specter!

How about minding your own business, which would be to work towards creating jobs so more people could be at work.

So they could buy more games.

Asshat.
 
Then why the hell were the video game ratings instituted in the place?

It's not the violence, language, and content of these mature rated games that are the harm... it's the kids parents that don't give a shit what their brats do inside and outside of their homes.
 
I think that boring is worse, and that you lot on HardForum are boring!
:D
 
Hey Warren , how about you make a new PC game and not some Disney branded crap and then I'll give a shit what you have to say.
 
DejaWiz said:
Hey, I'm all for ultraviolence if it's all in fun. You know, like video games that morons want to ban. :p
Click to expand...

I am for troll-baiting. It’s like the opposite of trolling and a bit like fishing. It is going to be the next big thing on the Internet. You can get lots of followers, if you don’t mind getting your arse bit.:p
 
I agree with the guy.
When i was younger and Soldier of fortune came out and u could dismember ppl it was like ooooh ahhh cause it had never really been done like that before.
Now instead of the damage being a consequence of your actions , it slowed down and aimed to be an entertainment factor. Instead of the gameplay.

I'm totaly fine with blood and realistic damage as long as it's not gimmicky.
I'd compare the ultra "violence" to the crap bulletstorm pulled *yawn* borring crap is boring.
 
Well if we go old school... i.e before computers, TV, movies, hell even before ELECTRICITY the thing we should ban is religion.

If you had to name a single thing that's injured or killed more people in history there really is only one answer.

The number of people who blow away innocent people, microwave babies, and rob/steal/kill/rape always seems to come back to that magic voice in the sky.

Not thread jacking into a religious thread - i do agree that a 9 year old shouldn't be playing hyper realistic murder games. If your 9 year old thinks it's "Normal" to pick up hookers in GTA, then kill them and take your 10 dollars back... well you failed as a parent.

By and large the people having kids today just flat shouldn't have them, the parents are so desperate for a break from their kids they just flat don't care what it takes to shut them up. The nintendo generation sucks at raising children.

/30 years old and happily childless.
//keep your kids away from me, they are ugly, stupid, smelly, and NOT special.
 
HardUp4HardWare said:
A few eweks ago some freak ate a homeless guys face.
Why don't we focus on REAL violence first, then pick on video games after that.
Click to expand...
That requires actual responsibility. How dare someone ask society to actually solve problems when clearly it's easier to just find a convenient scapegoat - especially when said scapegoat is outselling you hand over fist.

Although I will say that Angry Birds is pretty fucking violent.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Angry Birds is extremely violent. It's not realistically gory though, which is what he's really complaining about. You want to talk about gory? Nature is gory. Predators eviscerating a prey animal is about as violent and gory as it gets. Nobody's clamoring to outlaw nature now are they? What else is gory? Meat packing plants. Vegans will want to outlaw those, but I'd hate to tell them what a combine harvester does to all the cute little bunnies and mice when it goes over the soybean field that they get their tofu made from. So yeah, even the tree-huggers participate in gory stuff indirectly.

Gory, violent stuff is part of living. It's not going away, no matter how much people want it to. As for real-world violence... stop blaming video games. With the amount of gory games I've played I should have made the human race extinct six times over by now if violent video games cause such a high level of misanthropy. To date, I am responsible for exactly 0.0 real-world human casualties. Games cause violence like porn causes pregnancies.
 
I'd like to point out that, despite what nearly everyone says where there shouldn't be a line drawn, I think for most people, subconciously, there is a line. Just, that line is common sense. I've spoken to people who told me that they believed that there shouldn't be any limitations or censorship, and that games should push the envelope in gore and violence for the purposes of having more gore and violence. I countered about the prospects of a literal baby-killing simulator (Not a GTA game, but a game where you literally do nothing but kill babies for no reason), and he said that obviously not to that point.

You know where that point is? The point where it really does become sickening? Common sense for the average, sane person. I think that it's not just the violence, but the reasoning behind it. Shooting someone with a rocket and their body exploding into guts is different than playing a Jack The Ripper simulator where you kill a prostitute and then disect the parts and perhaps eat them really REALLY isn't the same thing. I don't know if that's what people are trying to convey when they talk about "UltraViolence" in video games, but when I talk about it, it's what I mean.

Gore is supposed to be the unintentional (or sometimes even intentional) consequence of an action, not the entire purpose of the game, or a main prominent feature. GTA games aren't about hunting prostitutes, but the game doesn't stop you. That's different from a game where that's the stated goal.
 
You could give a sickly child a candy bar for information then proceed to kill him and take the candy bar back in deus ex. If anything we have become more restraint.
 
I don't think we have the technology to make games especially violent. It takes great skill and effort to give medium emotional impact, and effectively conveying violence is crude at the best of times. That might change a bit with motion capture, but we'll have to see.
 
I rather enjoyed slicing people in half, popping their heads off, tearing people in two, stabbing them through the chest, and then eating the hearts for health in The Darkness II.

This guy is a tool. He's missing out on great fun.
 
I don't support legislation stifling freedom of expression or banning games but I do think the entertainment industry at large should move away from gratuitous violence because at this point it's lost its shock value and doesn't add anything to most games. Violence for violence's sake does not a bad game good or a good game better.
 
ballistic90 said:
Gore is supposed to be the unintentional (or sometimes even intentional) consequence of an action, not the entire purpose of the game, or a main prominent feature. GTA games aren't about hunting prostitutes, but the game doesn't stop you. That's different from a game where that's the stated goal.
Click to expand...

That strictly depends on the developers intent with the game. If gore is the primary/stated goal, then that's what it is. It's not like any of us can't do even minimal [H]forum or web search engine research and find out about any game's premise well before it's even released, let alone right before buying it.

If a particular game is all about blood, gore, and mayhem and that bothers the person that would be playing it, well then they have the absolute freedom in this country to look at the ESRB rating, decide that it doesn't fit their interests, and to NOT BUY AND PLAY IT. That freedom of choice does not translate into them dictating that every developer and customer should be stripped of their freedom of choice and that such games should be "scaled back" or outright banned.
 
While I do agree that other forms of media (like your nightly news) are often way more dramatic and violent than video games I do kinda see where he's coming from.

During E3 there were a few games that even I was like, "ok, that's a bit too much...". There's a distinct difference in "realistic" violence as apposed to extreme violence just to be violent...saw one game where someone was getting shot and within 1 second more blood came out of him than the amount found in 10 real people! I was like, "Really??? That much???".

So, even though I am not against violence AT ALL (in media) and I do agree that parents need to be responsible I also feel that video games are becoming a little too over the top for their own good. I mean, I've watched videos of people being cut in half or stabbed to death that made me feel less uncomfortable then some of the shit I saw at E3...and not just because of the violent acts themselves but just the overall ridiculousness of it.
 
TechLarry said:
Hey, Specter!

How about minding your own business, which would be to work towards creating jobs so more people could be at work.

So they could buy more games.

Asshat.
Click to expand...
Are you confusing him with Arlen Specter? Because otherwise, you made no sense.
 
DejaWiz said:
That strictly depends on the developers intent with the game. If gore is the primary/stated goal, then that's what it is. It's not like any of us can't do even minimal [H]forum or web search engine research and find out about any game's premise well before it's even released, let alone right before buying it.

If a particular game is all about blood, gore, and mayhem and that bothers the person that would be playing it, well then they have the absolute freedom in this country to look at the ESRB rating, decide that it doesn't fit their interests, and to NOT BUY AND PLAY IT. That freedom of choice does not translate into them dictating that every developer and customer should be stripped of their freedom of choice and that such games should be "scaled back" or outright banned.
Click to expand...

Way to completely miss the point of my post and rely on the stupid tried and true blanket statement of "freedom!! Don't touch its!!!!"

Did you understand anything about what I said? Anything at all? Keep in mind that the games I'm talking about don't exist whatsoever in the mainstream, maybe a few independant game developers have tried it. In a video game, violence is either the only means to an end, or one of many. Violence and gore in a video game is the result of the character trying to complete an objective of some sort. If your character decapitates someone, it's usually because they are in your way or you are defending yourself, not because you want to find out what their blood tastes like.

Hell, few game developers steer clear of torture for example. And if they don't, it's because your character is usually interrogating and enemy. You're character isn't doing it to get their jollies. Do you understand at all what I'm talking about? It's the difference between a hero or anti-hero and a serial killer/sociopath.
 
I think these few candid words that this guy uttered to some journalist are getting spread much wider than they were ever intended.

I don't think any video games should be censored, (even if some sick person made a baby killing simulator), it is their creative right to do so. However if we as a society choose to buy these games and let the creators make a profit off it, they are going to continue this ultra-violence trend. Take action by not giving your money to games with content that you don't agree with, take responsibility for what your children are playing, restrict them to what you deem acceptable, and don't blame other people, media, or the creative arts for your own actions.
 
Piss and moan about a POS video game. Watch TV, go to a movie dork. You will see violence for all ages to watch. How about Jurassic Park where the T Rex eats the characters, including the family pets, blood and guts everywhere. What a Village Idiot, go play Mario fool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top