Hatred - Is there a line that can be crossed?

[doomgargoyle]

Captain Red said:

Dude's a billionaire and has created a game that pretty much a cultural icon almost completely by himself. What a loser dork.

Still a swedish fat fuck man child. And a rippoff.

What they praise is novelty and execution. Gone Home stood out by being a stand alone exercise in environmental story telling which and while environmental story telling had been used in games before it usually hadn't been expected to carry the whole experience like it had in Gone Home. Critics engaged the game on it's own terms and found a well executed short story.

A bunch of nerds on the internet then decided it didn't check enough boxes in game forum that existed in their heads and decided people liked it because the SJW Illuminati needed to further the gay agenda. [/B]

Dear Esther did it before, and did it better. GH was just a walking simulator.

[Captain Red]

I don't know, I thought it had more interactive elements and required afar more direct engagement from the player then Dear Ester, but as a wise man once said...

Point is, while it may be evidence that there is some disconnect between critics preferences and consumers it's hardly evidence of an agenda beyond a fondness for cretin school of thought on game design.

[Patrol1985]

Seems like "Postal with better graphics". There is also a risk that once the initial shock / thrill is gone, the game will turn out to be awfully boring. It is this company's first product so they probably want to make as much buzz around themselves as possible.

The game is by a Polish developer by the way :P

[Doomkid]

Captain Red said:

Thank goodness their are developers who remember what's really important about gaming: Making your mum mad in 1997.

This genuinely made me laugh aloud..

[DeathevokatioN]

This game looks like absolute shit. I have nothing to add about about the game itself that hasn't been said by dew on this thread, though.

But the problem with games like this IMO is that while it might not make gamers get up and kill, but rather just make society even more apathetic when it comes to the culture of violence we have that's escalating.... so that we become even more apathetic when it comes to murder, war, death and organized mass murder caused by Ameriakkka in the Middle East. HOWEVER, it's not like this wasn't present in games such as Modern Warfare which subconsciously makes it seem okay acceptable you're killing 'subhumans' or 'freeing' them?

On a sidenote it looks we've finally found the anti music wigger porno death grind guttural slam of gaming, where you design a stupid piece of shit with no redeeming qualities, where the sole purpose is to try feed off edgy and 'offensive' but once the shock value fades everyone realizes what a retard you are....

[FireFish]

Captain Red said:
Thank goodness their are developers who remember what's really important about gaming: Making your mum mad in 1997.

Doomkid
This genuinely made me laugh aloud..

I do not know why, but it is funny as hell !

----
Reality check for people from another planet ;

1992 : mortal kombat
A fighting game about 'protecting' earth while 'mutilating' opposing characters.
This game is one of the prime reasons they implemented Age ratings on video games
so healthy adults could know ; "oh this is an adult video game for people knowing
the difference bewteen reality and fiction !"

1993 : DooM
A game about killing aliens / demons which contained a swastika and secret levels with nazi...
The gore and violence in this game was 'extreme' for that time and nobody ever said one word
about a story when they made this game one of the second reasons video games received age ratings
so healthy adults could know ; "oh this is an adult video game for people knowing
the difference bewteen reality and fiction !"

1997 : Postal
A game about a person going postal and thus killing unarmed and armed 'innocent' characters.
Going ''postal'' was a reference to post office workers / postmen losing their mind and going
on a killing spree while spewing comments which where seen as funny like 'i will make them all pay !'.

~ wait what, isnt that what hatred is about according to the trailer ?

1997 ; gta
A game about maffia, shooting at everything which moves, car chases, blowing up cops...


2014 ; strap on a bomb
will you blow yourself up because of a drawing on television, according to the morale knights of superior lives ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yxQ_EPt4No

- who would want to go on a date with somebody who played that game for 6 hours ?
- A game promoting violence and murder ?
- protect the children ?
- year 1992 ?!?

it all has been done before many of the new generation where even born.
Unless the devellopers where to be real murdering rapists mutilating for fun, this game should not even
come close to being new and edgy to anybody but hypocrits going ; 'in our days...'

[Touchdown]

If anything, it is slightly more disturbing that people see absolutely nothing wrong with a relentness genocide of people in Columbia in BioShock Infinite where you mass-murder hundreds of people in very violent, bloody and brutal ways. Seriously, if you want to be completely objective, what kind of a sick psychopath would mutilate people like that just for the sake of survival? It's more disturbing that people are fine with such a disgusting slaughter courtesy of a bloodthirsty maniac just because they have a lame justification for it ('b-but they are bad!').

Sure, you're not killing civilians but you've gotta be portraying a psychopathic murderer because, again, no normal person would do something like this. It's ridiculous that as long as your victim in a game is 'bad', it's socially acceptable to mutilate, rip, burn and electrocute him with a smile on your face. But when it's a game about shooting civilians? OUTRAGE!

[DooM_RO]

Touchdown said:

If anything, it is slightly more disturbing that people see absolutely nothing wrong with a relentness genocide of people in Columbia in BioShock Infinite where you mass-murder hundreds of people in very violent, bloody and brutal ways. Seriously, if you want to be completely objective, what kind of a sick psychopath would mutilate people like that just for the sake of survival? It's more disturbing that people are fine with such a disgusting slaughter courtesy of a bloodthirsty maniac just because they have a lame justification for it ('b-but they are bad!').

Sure, you're not killing civilians but you've gotta be portraying a psychopathic murderer because, again, no normal person would do something like this. It's ridiculous that as long as your victim in a game is 'bad', it's socially acceptable to mutilate, rip, burn and electrocute him with a smile on your face. But when it's a game about shooting civilians? OUTRAGE!

I agree 100%.

When I saw this trailer I burst out laughing, not only because of how corny the dude is but also because I knew the whole "gaming media" was going to spew all kinds of hypocrytical shit.

This game is perfectly aware of what it is and I commend it for that. In games like COD you do the exact thing, you kill hundreds of PEOPLE. The russians you kill in COD? They are people with hobbies, emotions, families, beliefs; in many ways just like the civilians in Hatred but COD not only glorifies the actions of the player but makes him feel like he is doing a good and noble thing thing, like everything in the world is black and white which is far more despicable than what Hatred is doing. At least this game is not trying to cook up some lame 'Murican style story in a half assed attempt to justify what you are doing. More often than not, stories in intense, bombastic and visceral games like COD or BF4 are just a lame and transparent excuses for you to kill stuff.

This game was made to piss people off while also making money off that and it has succeeded so far. People fell for it, which is hilarious. If people REALLY think these kinds of games are harmful then appropriate response is ignoring them.

[Captain Red]

Uh, Booker *is* portrayed as a psychopathic murderer. He's an ex-Pinkerton for goodness sake, and you spend a chunk of the game chasing Elisabeth after she freaks out after you brutally murder a bunch of police.

[Belial]

Looks cool, will try.

[doomgargoyle]

Captain Red said:

Uh, Booker *is* portrayed as a psychopathic murderer. He's an ex-Pinkerton for goodness sake, and you spend a chunk of the game chasing Elisabeth after she freaks out after you brutally murder a bunch of police.

Bioshock infinite gets a pass because it's a pumped game from a big studio with a multimillion dollar marketing budget behind it, with overrated developers like Ken Levine, that has this pretencious contrived and downright stupid story to justify the violence, which is pretty stupid to begin with. This is a game from a no-name developer from an ex communist country that shits on any story to justify anything. Its like postal but with even less story. What's interesting is how easy its still is in 2014, to fan the flames of controversy, it's pressing the exact buttons as 1992 with Mk like mentioned here. But is this game really causing controversy outside youtube, and some gaming sites? I havent heard of the game being mentioned in non-gaming media.

[slowtorturepukechamber]

This game is the Postal of this millennium. It's causing a big stink, and will be banned in a state or 2, but in a few years, it'll become a cult classic for it's "edginess". But, that's just my opinion.

TBH, I'll be sure to check this game out once it's released.

[Blastfrog]

I otherwise think this could be an interesting game just for the pure visceral focus but Postal 1 already did it first (and arguably in a more appealing tone) and I don't really want to support the developers. Fraggle - they're extreme right wingers, short of being fullblown "literal neo-nazis". I still wish to actively boycott them for this, but please don't exaggerate. All the evidence I've seen points to them simply being xenophobic but nowhere have I seen swastikas or any other actual Nazi references, though I'm open to being proven wrong if I haven't looked deeply enough into the issue.

Other than that, I find this game kinda boring. I'm much more looking forward to Paradise Lost.

[doomgargoyle]

facelessdoomer said:

This game is the Postal of this millennium. It's causing a big stink, and will be banned in a state or 2, but in a few years, it'll become a cult classic for it's "edginess". But, that's just my opinion.

TBH, I'll be sure to check this game out once it's released.

Agreed on everything except on it becoming a cult classic. At least it wont be anything cult classic than Postal 1 is.

[DooM_RO]

doomgargoyle said:

Bioshock infinite gets a pass because it's a pumped game from a big studio with a multimillion dollar marketing budget behind it, with overrated developers like Ken Levine, that has this pretencious contrived and downright stupid story to justify the violence, which is pretty stupid to begin with. This is a game from a no-name developer from an ex communist country that shits on any story to justify anything. Its like postal but with even less story. What's interesting is how easy its still is in 2014, to fan the flames of controversy, it's pressing the exact buttons as 1992 with Mk like mentioned here. But is this game really causing controversy outside youtube, and some gaming sites? I havent heard of the game being mentioned in non-gaming media.

Agree 100%

Also, my suspicions were correct, their game was made to piss people off and make money off their reactions. It worked, good for them. . If this game DOES inspire a mass killer, then the press will be partially responsible for it because they made it popular in the first place. Gamers and press should really have more awareness and intelligence. I suppose you can forgive gamers but the press should be a bit wiser, because they're the press. They're supposed to have an appropriate response about this and if they truly think this is harmful then they should just ignore it but I guess that clickbait money is too attractive to them. So the press are either retarded or greedy.

Just read this lulzy excerpt

"Many can call us 'attention whores,'" Zielinski continued. "Well, we try to get world's attention to our product and as you can see — it worked perfectly. ... We wish to thank all of our haters and all upset press for a great marketing campaign they've done for us.

"A week ago, we were a little company from the middle of nowhere, just some guys making some game. Today everyone heard about 'Hatred' and us. All thanks goes to those who were trying to harm us (with no desired effect, what a pity).

http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/21/7028531/hatred-lashes-out-in-blog-post-thanks-press-for-attention

[Captain Red]

Was anyone actively calling for this game to be banned?
For the record, even if these guys where dyed in the wool Nazis who programmed this game on a computer powered by Hitlers living brain, The most I would do would be to say "are you sure you want to give money to these guys?"

But it's nice to know they're not fascists I suppose. Maybe It'll be worth the $1.99 steam sale in 2020.

[doomgargoyle]

DooM_RO said:

Agree 100%

Also, my suspicions were correct, their game was made to piss people off and make money off their reactions. It worked, good for them. . If this game DOES inspire a mass killer, then the press will be partially responsible for it because they made it popular in the first place. Gamers and press should really have more awareness and intelligence. I suppose you can forgive gamers but the press should be a bit wiser, because they're the press. They're supposed to have an appropriate response about this and if they truly think this is harmful then they should just ignore it but I guess that clickbait money is too attractive to them. So the press are either retarded or greedy.

Just read this lulzy excerpt

"Many can call us 'attention whores,'" Zielinski continued. "Well, we try to get world's attention to our product and as you can see — it worked perfectly. ... We wish to thank all of our haters and all upset press for a great marketing campaign they've done for us.

"A week ago, we were a little company from the middle of nowhere, just some guys making some game. Today everyone heard about 'Hatred' and us. All thanks goes to those who were trying to harm us (with no desired effect, what a pity).

http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/21/7028531/hatred-lashes-out-in-blog-post-thanks-press-for-attention

It remains to be seen whether the controversy will still be big enough to guarantee sales by the time the game ships. Will they release more trailers with even more gimmicks all the way until shipping day? Will someone still care ? Will the non-gaming media pick it up?

[Doomkid]

Captain Red said:

Maybe It'll be worth the $1.99 steam sale in 2020.

2014*

[Ed]

Doesn't bother me. Nothing bothers me.

[Touchdown]

Here's my thought on a subject that people keep bringing up. I'm curious if anyone agrees with me on this.

So, many people compare Hatred to GTA saying that while in GTA you can kill civilians, it's ok because you're not forced to do it. Am I the only one who thinks this is completely backwards?

When I play a game where I don't have a choice and I'm forced to kill enemies, I don't feel bad about it. That's what the game is about, no problem. BUT when the game gives me an option, lethal or non-lethal, I gotta say I always feel kind of uncomfortable about choosing the lethal path. You know why? Because it's MY choice. Sure, they are enemies... But still, I can spare them. If I choose to kill, it's my choice alone.

In my opinion it's more disturbing when you CHOOSE to be the bad guy. I look at Hatred and it doesn't bother me because it's the premise of the game. However when you HAVE a choice and you choose to murder hundreds of civilians, that's a bit different. I don't understand this. How can anyone say with a straight face that they are offended by Hatred but at the same time they admit mass-murdering innocent people FOR FUN in games like GTA? How is CHOOSING to be a mass-murderer completely acceptable and it's ok to do it FOR FUN but a game that puts you in that role by design is somehow going too far?

I think the choice actually makes it worse if you choose to be a psychopatic murderer in a game because it's your initiative. But for some reason everyone thinks the opposite.

a note: just to be clear, I'm fine with people who mass-murder civilians in GTA. It's fine to choose the 'dark' path in games. I'm just pointing out this weird dissonance in the morality of certain people.

[Doomkid]

Touchdown said:

How can anyone say with a straight face that they are offended by Hatred but at the same time they admit mass-murdering innocent people FOR FUN in games like GTA? How is CHOOSING to be a mass-murderer completely acceptable and it's ok to do it FOR FUN but a game that puts you in that role by design is somehow going too far?

I agree with the point you make here. If someone who likes GTA is actually offended by a game like Hatred, they need to 1) Consider how hypocritical they are, for the exact reason you pointed out, and 2) Go back to 1996 when people actually gave a shit about violence in games.

All the people who get their panties in a knot over dark themes in gaming can make their opinions be heard by simply choosing not to buy these games. I remember this same argument being made about DOOM in years gone by, and I thought it made perfect sense. If you don't like the game - don't buy it. That said, if someone thinks it's their place to decide morality for our entire culture (ban all mass murder sims!), they are definitely overstepping their bounds. This is why the rating system came in, to save us from these conservative douches who want to ban fun. Let 'em know it's a gore-filled hate fest, and if they still complain, there's no one at fault but themselves.

I'm not sure if there's any credibility to the claim that "these games are disrupting the development of young brains" (or whatever the hell), the only aspect of that I could possibly see would be desensitization, but even then there's the flipside where these games allow people to blow off steam and go into a fantasy world where nothing really matters.

Considering the artificial lifestyle we're all living these days, it's practically meditation.

[Aliotroph?]

I can't remember if I replied in here. I know I voted.

I think games should have the same rules as other media: let them explore absolutely anything they want as long as they don't hurt people doing it. Exploring disgusting/terrifying/obscene ideas doesn't count as hurting people.

AS for this game, it looks pretty meh. Like all games we just have to wait until it materializes to know for sure.

[Kontra Kommando]

So this game is basically a new and nihilistic version of project overkill

I saw the trailer. Honestly, I wasn't offended in the slightest. I've seen tons death in movies and video games; why single this game out for it? But at the same time, I was not convinced to buy it either.

[Touchdown]

Hatred appeared on Steam Greenlight but Valve took it down saying: "Based on what we've see on Greenlight we would not publish Hatred on Steam. As such we'll be taking it down."

Way to go.

[Clonehunter]

That's pretty retarded. I guess Steam should take down the rest of their violent titles, just to comply with their new morals as presented to them by the Greenlight community.

[FireFish]

Touchdown said:

Hatred appeared on Steam Greenlight but Valve took it down saying: "Based on what we've see on Greenlight we would not publish Hatred on Steam. As such we'll be taking it down."
Way to go.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... HAHAHAHA !
I do not know why but i can't stop imagining adult hiveminds posting cats, mutilation, and racism all day suddenly storming the greenlight system in a rage against the brutal and inhumane steam machine ! edit ; to stop the game from being released !

[Clonehunter]

Pffft....

[Blastfrog]

I'm not really a fan of the devs, but this was a very shitty move on Valve's part. I know they've taken games down before for "excess" sexual themes, I wonder if they'd do the same for any kind of drug-centric theme.

They seriously need to define what exactly is objectionable to them, because it seems pretty random. I already have trust issues with Valve, this just makes it worse.

[Technician]

Valve doesn't want to kick the West Coast hornets nest.

[printz]

Well, the very bad voice acting, the low quality graphics and the emotionally void premise make all this quite an ineffective impression.