Is it possible for a mod to get banned only because of violent content?

[Pegleg]

Will it get banned? Probably not. So, that's how I voted.

 

Is it in bad taste? That would depend on what you ended up doing. Be somewhat careful about watering down your vision too much, though, or you end up with basically just another Hell map with nothing to really distinguish it. On the other end of the spectrum is make sure you do it well, or you end up distinguishing it for all the wrong reasons.

 

Would I want to play it? Most likely not. Personally, I'm not a big fan of this type of horror.

 

That being said, I tend to agree with mrthejoshman, some of the best horror, the most mid-twisting psychological sort of horror, is in what you don't see. And it's not just horror where this sort of thing works. Notice that in Revenge of the Sith, you never actually saw Anakin slaughter the children in the Jedi temple, but you still knew what happened.

 

Although I will say that what you would actually be communicating (in game) is that the demons in Hell are remarkably evil and twisted in that they would take innocent children and mutilate them and corrupt them for their own ends.

 

Also, you would be implying that the demons in Hell are working outside of some sort of grander, divine (if you will), plan. As Dew stated, the idea of Limbo is that it is the place where the unbaptized, but otherwise innocent, individuals (be they babies, children, or adults) spend eternity. They can't be punished because they have no sins to be punished for. So, for the demons of Hell to raid Limbo and steal away children for their own machinations seems to go against any sort of grand plan. Because to say that innocent children would be condemned to Hell for an eternity of torment is anathema to most people.

 

Yes, Jonathan Edwards did say, "The road to Hell is paved with the skulls of unbaptized babies." But that was Puritanism hellfire and brimstone and its finest.

[Memfis]

I believe at least in some Puritan writings these babies do go to hell. There is a scene where the babies ask god why are they treated so horribly, and he replies: "If you were predestined to go to heaven undeservedly, I'm sure you wouldn't complain. Well, then don't complain about being predestined to hell either". It's probably the most mind-boggling argument ever made.

[ETTiNGRiNDER]

19 hours ago, dew said:

Is this correct though? I lived under the impression that Harris did not upload his wads to idgames and Ty simply blocked the samaritan "archivists" who started uploading the existing wads after Columbine. I mean, I'm saying you might be wrong as usual and instead of hindsight it was just common sense that was being consistently applied. But I could be wrong, in which case I apologize!

This is something I was wondering about recently, actually.  The sources I've read on Doom Wiki and Wikipedia mostly seem to imply that you're right and that they were never on idgames in the first place so the ban was against people uploading them after the fact once there was a particular infamy attached, not a removal of something that was already on the archive.  But I haven't seen anything say that with complete 100% clarity either, so I'm not totally sure.

[Liberation]

It all depends on how its implemented, as mentioned the horror you can't see is generally more effective, if its just babies hanging or on stakes then I reckon it would upset some people and others will think its just cheap gore. 

 

That said, low res sprites aren't exactly going to give people nightmares, but the principle alone will get you some stick. 

 

EDIT: It's just occurred to me that this is one of the most bizarre threads ive seen in wads and mods in ages. 

Edited July 4, 2018 by Liberation

[Pirx]

With doom's low res cartoon graphics? Not really. Wait, didn't we shoot those pesky hell babies in doom 3 already?

[Resigned_34]

If the mod contains shit that isn't "real" (like images of actual murder) then it should be perfectly fine.

 

The problem is really how one would pull off such an idea within a doom mod without it coming off as very "edgy".

[Maes]

9 hours ago, Resigned_34 said:

If the mod contains shit that isn't "real" (like images of actual murder) then it should be perfectly fine.

 

The problem is really how one would pull off such an idea within a doom mod without it coming off as very "edgy".

 

Well, Ratzepimmel's world exists.... I'd say take a lesson from the Ancients and release it in such a way that it flies under the radar, or at least entices the archive maintainer to say "You know what? Fuck it. Let's let it in and see if anybody actually gives a flying fuck" ;-)

 

I mean, FFS, they let UACMN in there....

[Pure Hellspawn]

 

On 7/4/2018 at 1:33 PM, Pirx said:

With doom's low res cartoon graphics? Not really. Wait, didn't we shoot those pesky hell babies in doom 3 already?

 

DOOM doesn't necessary equal low res cartoon graphics anymore. Not with GZDOOM. 

[Maes]

3 hours ago, Pure Hellspawn said:

 

 

DOOM doesn't necessary equal low res cartoon graphics anymore. Not with GZDOOM. 

 

The question is: can hardcore_gamer produce content up to the engine's capabilities? *wink*

 

As far as fucked up (un)dead babies go...how about the Atropal Scion from D&D?