Is Extreme, Senseless Violence Bad?

[Pagan Hungary]

Fairly sure this game is just being edgy on purpose, and so many people have given it publicity because of that; the devs are pretty smart blokes.

Destructive (the developers) happens to have ties with some of Poland's Far-Right and Fascist groups.

Good on them for being politically active but I fail to see how this part of the comment is relevant to video games being violent.

[Reploid Productions]

There are plenty of ways to keep undesirable games out of your household or to child proof your electronics. I think that what is a bigger issue related to this, is the fact that there are only around 30 AO rated games by the ESRB throughout its entire history.

The video game industry in policing itself, has ensured that every new very violent game produced, will qualify for the M rating so that the game will sell more because retailers will carry M games but generally won't for AO. The only difference that AO has generally speaking, is that it has blatant sexual content while M games don't.

If the video game industry along with retailers could get beyond the idea that games are primarily for children, I think more AO games could be made and this source of stagnation wouldn't be present from the stigmatization of the ESRB's highest rating. The AO rating may as well not exist under the status quo, because it is just a place holder for the very rare AO game that gets released. I want to get every rating to see regular use.

Eh, AO is a lot like movies and NC-17. There's the stigma attached to being that edgy, limiting both the potential consumer base for the product as well as the retailers willing to carry it. Fewer potential buyers coupled with fewer potential sellers translates into lackluster profits. Comes down to the money; much like NC-17, AO just isn't profitable, which is why so few games bother to go that far. When the primary difference between an M and an AO is blatant sexual content (or absurdly hyperrealistic violence), the sex just doesn't sell enough games to the 18+ crowd compared to the boatloads a publisher can potentially get from the 16+ crowd for a slightly less sexy M game.

Also, games that go far enough to get an AO... tend to be kinda shitty games because all the dev budget clearly went to modelling TEH BOOBIES instead of making sure the game itself is any good. Hell, the game at the heart of this current kerfluffle isn't even AO territory. An easy M, sure, but still an M. And if the trailer is anything to go by, it's little more than a mediocre "I've had a bad day" catharsis game. About the only way I could see it getting an AO rating is if it had the dev budget and talent pool of a AAA dev team that could churn out a hyper-realistic first-person version of the premise. The third-person and isometric cameras don't enhance the gruesomeness or the violence; they distance the player from it.

[Republic of Coldwater]

I honestly don't give a fuck if video games are extremely violent, if they are interesting and entertaining (focus on entertaining), I'll play it, regardless of how violent the game is. There are many people who play very violent games like GTA V, indeed it grossed $1 Billion in a matter of days, yet we have seen almost no shooting or murder of anyone as a result of such games. Most people play games for fun and to relax, not to get inspiration to kill somebody.

So why don't we just calm our shit down and let violent video games exist, as they aren't dangerous, and some are incredibly fun.

[Southern Hampshire]

As a GTA 2 player from the age of 5 and it's sequels ever since, I am proud to announce I never killed someone.

I know. Shocking.

My grandfather plays it too. He's never killed anyone. (innocent)

[Purpelia]

Art should newer be censored for any reason other than promoting rebellion against the state. And video games are art.

[CTALNH]

This is a juveniles version of what violence is.

[Prezelly]

It is a game. Just because It is violent doesn't make it bad.

[Zottistan]

My name is not important. What is important is what I'm going to do ... I just fuckin' hate this world. And the human worms feasting on its carcass. My whole life is just cold, bitter hatred. And I always wanted to die violently. This is the time of vengeance and no life is worth saving. And I will put in the grave as many as I can. It's time for me to kill. And it's time for me to die. My genocide crusade begins here.

This is possibly the worst bit of monologue I have ever seen.

Honestly, though, anybody who is persuaded to try to kill other people by a video game isn't the kind of person we should be letting out in public in the first instance.

[Purpelia]

My name is not important. What is important is what I'm going to do ... I just fuckin' hate this world. And the human worms feasting on its carcass. My whole life is just cold, bitter hatred. And I always wanted to die violently. This is the time of vengeance and no life is worth saving. And I will put in the grave as many as I can. It's time for me to kill. And it's time for me to die. My genocide crusade begins here.

This is possibly the worst bit of monologue I have ever seen.

To be fair. I feel that its badness actually does it good in this case. Violent psychopaths about to go on a rampage are usually not the most eloquent of people.

[Howltaria]

Oh man this trailer looks like its 2edy4me all violence no plot. If a game like Fallout 3 could make it where limbs literally fly off, this game has no hope in hell in being banned. Should it be banned? No.

[Big Brain City]

I find this very scary and mind-altering and I won't play it.
You can.

Oh man this trailer looks like its 2edy4me all violence no plot. If a game like Fallout 3 could make it where limbs literally fly off, this game has no hope in hell in being banned. Should it be banned? No.

Also, if you play Black Ops 2 and go back in time with a future shotgun, you can blow shit off. Also they have a pulwar in the Afghanistan level that can decapitate people.

[Terra Sector Union]

It's not so much of extreme violence in video games, in the context and it's subject matter. Hatred seems very terrible and seems like a game for antisocial psychopaths. I don't care if it's just a game, it's a game designed to entertain sick people. Violent military shooters are at least heroic.

[Infected Mushroom]

This game makes me really really sick...

I think I'm going to throw up.

[Lordieth]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWwVe8PQHm4

Summary: Violent games don't make you violent. In fact violent games have been shown to have entirely the opposite effect, and cause people to be more empathetic.

This is just another correlation does not imply causation argument. Many, many people play violent video games. It's no surprise that within this massive sample size, there will be violent people within that group. This is also a prime example of selection bias. 99% of people who play violent video games aren't violent.

In short; games make you smarter and are awesome.

[Republic of Coldwater]

There are plenty of ways to keep undesirable games out of your household or to child proof your electronics. I think that what is a bigger issue related to this, is the fact that there are only around 30 AO rated games by the ESRB throughout its entire history.

The video game industry in policing itself, has ensured that every new very violent game produced, will qualify for the M rating so that the game will sell more because retailers will carry M games but generally won't for AO. The only difference that AO has generally speaking, is that it has blatant sexual content while M games don't.

If the video game industry along with retailers could get beyond the idea that games are primarily for children, I think more AO games could be made and this source of stagnation wouldn't be present from the stigmatization of the ESRB's highest rating. The AO rating may as well not exist under the status quo, because it is just a place holder for the very rare AO game that gets released. I want to get every rating to see regular use.

Eh, AO is a lot like movies and NC-17. There's the stigma attached to being that edgy, limiting both the potential consumer base for the product as well as the retailers willing to carry it. Fewer potential buyers coupled with fewer potential sellers translates into lackluster profits. Comes down to the money; much like NC-17, AO just isn't profitable, which is why so few games bother to go that far. When the primary difference between an M and an AO is blatant sexual content (or absurdly hyperrealistic violence), the sex just doesn't sell enough games to the 18+ crowd compared to the boatloads a publisher can potentially get from the 16+ crowd for a slightly less sexy M game.

Also, games that go far enough to get an AO... tend to be kinda shitty games because all the dev budget clearly went to modelling TEH BOOBIES instead of making sure the game itself is any good. Hell, the game at the heart of this current kerfluffle isn't even AO territory. An easy M, sure, but still an M. And if the trailer is anything to go by, it's little more than a mediocre "I've had a bad day" catharsis game. About the only way I could see it getting an AO rating is if it had the dev budget and talent pool of a AAA dev team that could churn out a hyper-realistic first-person version of the premise. The third-person and isometric cameras don't enhance the gruesomeness or the violence; they distance the player from it.

Why do we need labeling for the age recommendation? It is meaningless and doesn't stop minors from acquiring items not meant for their age.

[Shilya]

It shouldn't. Just because it's dumb doesn't mean it's harmful. Any causal relationship between video games violence and real life violence has yet to be shown, at best more violent people also play more violent games (duh).

Parents are responsible for their childrens media consumption.

[Schwabenreich]

Why do we need labeling for the age recommendation? It is meaningless and doesn't stop minors from acquiring items not meant for their age.

It should just be there placate moral guardians who get off on arbitrarily limiting their children's education.

Parents are responsible for their childrens media consumption.

I'll admit they have the most power over that and therefor some responsibility however there is really nothing a parent can do short of removing the internet and monitoring the child at all times, when they're at a friend's place, when they're at school. A child has an option to all sorts of content, for free if they know how.

[Socialist Tera]

Banning violent video games is stupid. A majority of people I know who play "violent video games" are not violent people.

[The Sotoan Union]

Funny. This game was made as a parody of games being art or beautiful. It was designed to be as simple and politically incorrect as possible.

[Shilya]

Funny. This game was made as a parody of games being art or beautiful. It was designed to be as simple and politically incorrect as possible.

So, it's modern art?

[Saiwania]

Why do we need labeling for the age recommendation? It is meaningless and doesn't stop minors from acquiring items not meant for their age.

It came about because the US government back in 1993 wanted to get into legislating against violent video games in response to
Mortal Kombat and a few other controversial titles at the time. The video game industry voluntarily partakes in a ratings system as a matter of protecting itself from such efforts. Once the 103rd US congress was satisfied that the ESRB would provide for some basic mechanism for people to avoid violent games, the matter ended and video games were largely left alone again.

[Auroya]

No, videogame censorship is really, really sodding stupid.

Don't do it.

[Seraven]

An opportunity if somebody wants to kill civilians in games without remorse or police chasing.

But then again, Hatred is quite a good game with a good....gameplay-ish.

[Washington Resistance Army]

This game makes me really really sick...

I think I'm going to throw up.

Lolwut?

[The Sotoan Union]

Funny. This game was made as a parody of games being art or beautiful. It was designed to be as simple and politically incorrect as possible.

So, it's modern art?

From the developer.

The developer described Hatred as a reaction to a trend of political correctness in video games, and sought to make a game that eschewed politeness, colorfulness, and games as art. In this way, they also sought to make a game that recalled the industry's history as " a rebellious medium" and surface-level entertainment with no insertion of "any fake philosophy".