The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Allow me to introduce myself. I am a gamer. That is all. I like to play good games. Whether they be on an 8bit spectrum or 128bit PS2. Why do I like to play games? They allow me to do things that I could never do in real life, be people I could never be. A racing driver, a secret agent, a space hero. I can be them all.
Games are my release from life. I enjoy skating around Tokyo spraying graffiti everywhere. I enjoy killing zombies and aliens. Oh hell, I enjoy sniping russian communist solidiers right between their eyes. That's right. In the gaming world I enjoy killing. It realeases my agression. I watch the soldier slump against a wall and leave a trail of blood as he slips to the ground. Sweet.
So why then do games designers hold off making death i games realistic? To stop people doing acts of evil in real life? In real life I am a shy, quiet sensible person. I achieve top grades at school and aspire to be a researcher in computing. So why my love of killing? Because the whole point of games is to do things you can't in real life.
Does anyone complain that you drive at speeds of over 100mph in central london in MSR? No. But if you were to do that in real life you would enevitably kill someone. Likewise, if I graffitied over Tokyo's walls then I would be arrested. So what is so different in killing people in games. If people believe that it will lead to people repeating these actions in real life, I would point out that books, television and other media all show people killing each other. Sometimes with even more graphic details. In a book you can see your face on that of the killer's. In a TV program you can see through the eyes of the killer and feel their emotions. In games you are playing under a fasade. If you want to kill someone you will do it regardless of whether you play it in a game or not.
So, why hold back on death scenes in games? They don't do this in films of television.
Games are my release from life. I enjoy skating around Tokyo spraying graffiti everywhere. I enjoy killing zombies and aliens. Oh hell, I enjoy sniping russian communist solidiers right between their eyes. That's right. In the gaming world I enjoy killing. It realeases my agression. I watch the soldier slump against a wall and leave a trail of blood as he slips to the ground. Sweet.
So why then do games designers hold off making death i games realistic? To stop people doing acts of evil in real life? In real life I am a shy, quiet sensible person. I achieve top grades at school and aspire to be a researcher in computing. So why my love of killing? Because the whole point of games is to do things you can't in real life.
Does anyone complain that you drive at speeds of over 100mph in central london in MSR? No. But if you were to do that in real life you would enevitably kill someone. Likewise, if I graffitied over Tokyo's walls then I would be arrested. So what is so different in killing people in games. If people believe that it will lead to people repeating these actions in real life, I would point out that books, television and other media all show people killing each other. Sometimes with even more graphic details. In a book you can see your face on that of the killer's. In a TV program you can see through the eyes of the killer and feel their emotions. In games you are playing under a fasade. If you want to kill someone you will do it regardless of whether you play it in a game or not.
So, why hold back on death scenes in games? They don't do this in films of television.
Page:
its always the quiet ones that turn out to be psychotic serial killers
SERIOS DAVE wrote:
> i tottaly agree what logan sayed im a sensibile guy to but i love
> killing with big guns its my only way to get my anger out,quake 3
> and team arena are great shoot em ups especally when they exploed
> and their blood and gibs fly everywhere lovly :~).the next gen
> consoles should focus on make death more real
games and music are my release. And hitting my head against a wall...
> i tottaly agree what logan sayed im a sensibile guy to but i love
> killing with big guns its my only way to get my anger out,quake 3
> and team arena are great shoot em ups especally when they exploed
> and their blood and gibs fly everywhere lovly :~).the next gen
> consoles should focus on make death more real
games and music are my release. And hitting my head against a wall...
i tottaly agree what logan sayed im a sensibile guy to but i love killing with big guns its my only way to get my anger out,quake 3 and team arena are great shoot em ups especally when they exploed and their blood and gibs fly everywhere lovly :~).the next gen consoles should focus on make death more real
AliBoy wrote:
> The reason death scenes aren't as gory as tv or movies is gaming
> used to be and still is mostly for children. Alot of adults now play
> games and enjoy them but if a child was to play a extremely gory
> game then it could have serious effects on them. I know it would
> have an 18 rating and they shouldn't be playing it but I bet alot of
> you watch 18 films when you weren't/aren't old enough. The problem
> is games require interaction, you are more involved and part of it
> than with a film.
Developers take a big chance if they choose to
> make a game that is very gory, it could be banned or when its
> released be critisied by the media and parents. This could ruin
> their image and may even see an end to them making games. This is
> probably why games don't have very gory death scenes.
Alternatively it would cause a stir, get hype, and sell loads! Conkers bad fur day....
> The reason death scenes aren't as gory as tv or movies is gaming
> used to be and still is mostly for children. Alot of adults now play
> games and enjoy them but if a child was to play a extremely gory
> game then it could have serious effects on them. I know it would
> have an 18 rating and they shouldn't be playing it but I bet alot of
> you watch 18 films when you weren't/aren't old enough. The problem
> is games require interaction, you are more involved and part of it
> than with a film.
Developers take a big chance if they choose to
> make a game that is very gory, it could be banned or when its
> released be critisied by the media and parents. This could ruin
> their image and may even see an end to them making games. This is
> probably why games don't have very gory death scenes.
Alternatively it would cause a stir, get hype, and sell loads! Conkers bad fur day....
The reason death scenes aren't as gory as tv or movies is gaming used to be and still is mostly for children. Alot of adults now play games and enjoy them but if a child was to play a extremely gory game then it could have serious effects on them. I know it would have an 18 rating and they shouldn't be playing it but I bet alot of you watch 18 films when you weren't/aren't old enough. The problem is games require interaction, you are more involved and part of it than with a film.
Developers take a big chance if they choose to make a game that is very gory, it could be banned or when its released be critisied by the media and parents. This could ruin their image and may even see an end to them making games. This is probably why games don't have very gory death scenes.
Developers take a big chance if they choose to make a game that is very gory, it could be banned or when its released be critisied by the media and parents. This could ruin their image and may even see an end to them making games. This is probably why games don't have very gory death scenes.
Severed heads flying across a room and splatting against a wall, then gorging out the eyes with a fork and eating them. Yeah, I can live with this.
You can't win. This argument could go on for ever.
Do games make killers etc?
Do games make killers etc?
GasMask wrote:
> Logan wrote:
> GasMask wrote:
> Why hold back? It can
> inspire "dumb"
> game players to carry
> out acts
> they saw in a violent
> game.
And TV/films do not do
> this?
But TV/files are not interactive.
I knew somebody astute would notice this! However, I find that books are more interactive than games. You put your face onto that of the assasin. You feel the blood on your hands. That is far more interactive than any game.
And in films, there is one difference. Violence and death are glorified... made "cool" by big special effects.
Games are no better or worse.
> Logan wrote:
> GasMask wrote:
> Why hold back? It can
> inspire "dumb"
> game players to carry
> out acts
> they saw in a violent
> game.
And TV/films do not do
> this?
But TV/files are not interactive.
I knew somebody astute would notice this! However, I find that books are more interactive than games. You put your face onto that of the assasin. You feel the blood on your hands. That is far more interactive than any game.
And in films, there is one difference. Violence and death are glorified... made "cool" by big special effects.
Games are no better or worse.
Page: