I really wish that video games had more non-violent options. (And entertainment in general)

[DDayton]

I feel like there is a distinction to be made between abstract violence and "realistic" violence.

Many board games are based on violent themes, such as war, but at a very abstract level - chess, Stratego, Risk, etc..

Video games have become more and more focused on non-abstract, realistic violence.

To equate violence themes in abstract form (chess), or slightly less abstract form (Mario's jumping), with realistic violent viscera seems... odd.

On a different note, the classic Ali Baba and the 40 thieves was interesting in that the game allowed for and suggested playing through the adventure without harming a single creature. It was essentially a top-down battle focused exploration game, which was interesting for 1981.

 

[cosmicblizzard]

I understand, it's just I can't think of any jrpg where violence isn't depicted as gently as possible. I never even called it violence in my head. By this reasoning Super Mario is violent because he kills enemies by crushing, throwing or firing at them. I'm a fan of survival horrors and yes these are very violent. Shooters, horror games. Sure. Maybe Parasite Eve 1&2 could be seen as violent Jrpg but that is half survival horror by itself.

I get that games can get unnecessary violent and I'm scared that today's kids are playing them without any concern of their parents. That's just wrong. I just disagree on a jrpg front with you there. That's all.

Click to shrink...

Something can be violent without being excessively violent. JRPGs are violent as hell and plenty actually acknowledge that you're straight up murdering things and/or people.

And yeah, Mario is violent too. There was a whole Peta campaign against it for turtle abuse or something, I forget.

 

[Patapuf]

I understand, it's just I can't think of any jrpg where violence isn't depicted as gently as possible. I never even called it violence in my head. By this reasoning Super Mario is violent because he kills enemies by crushing, throwing or firing at them. I'm a fan of survival horrors and yes these are very violent. Shooters, horror games. Sure. Maybe Parasite Eve 1&2 could be seen as violent Jrpg but that is half survival horror by itself.

I get that games can get unnecessary violent and I'm scared that today's kids are playing them without any concern of their parents. That's just wrong. I just disagree on a jrpg front with you there. That's all.

Click to shrink...

Combat is the primary means of conflict resolution in the vast majority of JRPG. It is very often, the only means of conflict resolution.

The violence can be depicted as gently as it wants, it's still a genre primarily about violence.

OP is asking for more games where violence isn't your primary game mechanic. There are a quite a few of them, but the gaming industry does skew towards combat for almost everything.

 

[lvl 99 Pixel]

Something can be violent without being excessively violent. JRPGs are violent as hell and plenty actually acknowledge that you're straight up murdering things and/or people.

And yeah, Mario is violent too. There was a whole Peta campaign against it for turtle abuse or something, I forget.

Click to shrink...

Thats like saying bugs bunny is violent. Its so far removed from reality that enemies turning into stars could mean anything.

 

[bounchfx]

I really don't care what I'm doing in a game as long as it's fun. Floor Kids, Fishing, Papers Please, Puzzle games, overcooked. you can make good gameplay out of anything if you have an imagination.

 

[cosmicblizzard]

Thats like saying bugs bunny is violent.

Click to shrink...

Well yeah. Looney Tunes and other old cartoons like Tom and Jerry were controversial precisely because of that.

There's obviously levels of violence, but that doesn't stop mild violence from being just that.

 

[Not Spaceghost]

Honestly this was always part of the appeal to Mario Sunshine to me, I mean yeah you're still technically defeating dudes but most of the game you're just walking around hosing things off and jumping around lol. It was - dare I say - REFRESHING :^)

 

[WillyTheBikeGuy]

The majority of games are not violent. The violent ones just happen to be the most popular.

 

[its_Ditz]

Like, I know most people are probably not bothered by violence as I am.

Click to shrink...

Oh boy, I can tell you we´re not alone :)

For your first sentence on normalization -- I think you're trying to fish for something that's not there.

Click to shrink...

I actually believe he´s onto something. Sure, we´re being quite vague here and would need to have a deeper conversation about it - but I do believe that today´s morality is at a low point and it shows a lot in what people buy or look for in videogames e.g.
When I was 12, we were still having troubles just getting access to games like GTA or CoD etc. due to restrictions and people (not just parents) telling us that these games contain inapropriate material. Nowadays, I see 8 years old being able to "just" play thtese titles and... whew: don´t you dare to call these games "problematic, offensive or controversial" because it´ll cause a ****storm. Today´s world IS normalizing things like violence or nudity among others´ that were previously frowned upon. It begs the question if we ARE normalizing things that shouldn´t be or if we are... well, "evolving" and making steps forward. As I said, I think this is a topic where people, myself included, are being rather vague so far and we´d have to talk more thoroughly about it.


OP, did you play Undertale? If not, I assure you´ll love the game.

 

[Pila]

I'm not a big fan of videogames where you do violent things to real looking people. Last one I played was MGSV and I remember the injured guys begging for their life, I don't find it cool anymore now that I'm older.

I love something like Splatoon because it is violent I guess, it's fast and competitive, but it's not gore at all, it looks like a cute game and not a bloody war. Way better imho.

 

[MusclesAreGirly]

Would highly recommend Undertale to you if you haven't played it already

Click to shrink...

I played at enjoyed Undertale a lot. Felt very bad and horrified for Frisk at the neutral ending, though. The game definitely has violence, but it's nice that you can play without hurting anyone.
I mean, that is, if you can get the pacifist ending on the first run.

I'm a fan of Undertale, but not nearly as passionate about it as many people. I haven't played it in a while and I'm not really a part of the fandom.
But I've played it a couple times on different PCs and mean to try it again on my new one someday.

It has a great soundtrack. I haven't played it in a few months, but I definitely come back to the soundtrack from time to time.

 

[TheIlliterati]

I agree in general, but the real truth is that it's just impossible for developers to program for every time. Let's say most games are basically virtual shooting galleries, one of the most simplistic forms of interaction possible. You put a gun in your hand and you shoot a bullet. They complicate and build upon this basic scenario to build a million different first person shooters. In reality you would have millions of other options besides shooting a bullet, but these merely take design time, and there's no real point in giving players those options unless that's what the game is ABOUT. Deus Ex and a handful of other series abstract a certain layer of interaction above this, and then those games are much less played. It's a hugely frustrating reality. I don't see this ever changing unless there becomes a level of middleware wherein you can just plug in a system of interaction to your game. It'd probably be so generic that it would be pointless anyway.

 

[EarthPainting]

I'm not completely opposed to violence in games, but it often just feels pretty samey. I've played enough first and third person shooters that they sort of start to bleed together a bit. Violence is usually the only way we can interact with game worlds, and that just feels a very limited use of the medium.

 

[zoukka]

There are games where violence has consequences and the characters don't feel like just glorified targets. There's a big difference in the violent acts of let's say Shadow of Colossus and Call of Duty, one could definitely give kids some questionable experiences and models, while the other might make you even regret your actions.

Violence in MGS3 might seem downplayed at times and even comical, but there are moments in the game where the script is aware that killing is wrong and you have consequences both in gameplay and storytelling levels.

 

[Horned Reaper]

There's plenty non violent games. It's mostly just different genres. Puzzle, sports, racing, card games, rhythm games, simulators etc etc are mostly non violent. A ton of mobile games aren't violent either.

I think you're just not really looking.

 

[CloudWolf]

I definitely agree, I like my brainless shooters once in a while, but most of the time I play games that are very light on violence or where violence isn't the main method of interaction and I would love if there were more mainstream games that adopted that approach.

 

[Datajoy]

I sometimes question why it is that I take pleasure in performing violent actions in video games..... it makes me feel weird at times, but I can't deny that I really do enjoy popping stealth headshots in MGSV and hacking shit apart with swords, axes, and chainsaws in countless other games :/

 

[Bhonar]

Today´s world IS normalizing things like violence or nudity among others´ that were previously frowned upon.

Click to shrink...

Disagree with this statement, if you truly look into human's entire history.

For violence, what about during the Middle Ages? Crusades? Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Romans, etc.

Actually the majority of human history has been MORE violent than today.

As for nudity, that goes in cycles throughout history. Ancient Greeks accepted plenty of nudity. Or even more recently, the 70s with the "free love" era.

 

[Snormy]

I think there is thrill in overcoming danger and challenges, often games allow you to do so by pressing a few buttons. Kind of like a spike in adrenaline and excitement from going on a rollercoaster but games with violence delivers this in smaller doses of fulfillment. It triggers the response in our mind that we are "winning" and it is a positive feedback when you don't put thought into what is actually occurring. The challenge I guess is to find a way to provide a similar stimulation of positive feedback with enjoyable gameplay mechanics.

Spoiler: awful solutions

Such as the lure of cracking open a lootbox and the gacha mechanics.

I enjoyed Jet Set Radio's take on combat where you spray your tag on enemies to defeat them.

Games such as Cooking Mama and Cook, Serve, Delicious are enjoyable without any combat. Then we have story focus games such as To The Moon and Rakuen. Simulation games such as Harvest Moon as well or adventure games such as Attack of the Friday Monsters.

I also think one major gameplay aspect that I really appreciate when handled well is movement. I believe a game that revolves around this primary can still be excellent without combat and interestingly combat is the weakest aspect of Gravity Rush series which I do like a lot. I also think Mirror's Edge works well without combat.

 

[Lurcharound]

In general I'd argue that all mediums of entertainment have a strong element of combat/catharsis to them. Particularly popular works. Arguably cave paintings even their depictions of hunting and overcoming trials. Equally there has always been more contemplative elements, non violent being one.

Thus I see gaming as simply the latest medium to show up the same trends. There have been (still are arguably) elements of the medium that skew it heavily to combat/violence:

• the medium began and still is heavily focused on gaming side - this means a lot of competitive mechanics just like Chess or Tennis you're trying to "win" and you do so by mastering technique and beating your opponent. Obviously in many cases this is transplanted to scenarios that are less abstract such as wars, battles, and so on
• the interaction mechanisms remain fairly limited - a few buttons, some sticks, a keyboard or a mouse - and thus going for simple combat mechanics is an easy option vs say supporting complex interaction to represent gestures, conversation, tone of voice, etc (something films for example can excel at via performance of actors)
• eSports angle
• Online angle

That said I've always felt there are plenty of non combat options particularly of late.

 

[lazygecko]

Simple spatial interaction is what the industry has spent the most effort honing refined, intuitive and engaging systems for over several decades. Which mostly manifests as shooting/hitting stuff and moving objects around. So this has also snowballed into the most easy template to fall back on when designing a game regardless if the themes surrounding it want to aspire to something more.

 

[Gakidou]

Yeah, I think gaming kinda evolved into this 'ultra violent' trend because... well, all cultural ideas are all relatively derivative from eachother so homogeneous trends that could fairly be called 'uncreative' tend to happen. Pop culture detective is such a good channel and I completely agree, there's absolutely space, demand and potential for exploring so many different types of non-combat themed gaming mechanics.

Personally, I consider myself pretty desensitised. (90's kids, amirite?) I enjoy violent, gruesome or war-oriented games as much as I enjoy games about farming, friendship and problem solving. That said, this might sound weird but I genuinely appreciate people who are more sensitive than me. I find it very endearing and comforting when someone draws a line at what they are comfortable with before I have to worry about where I draw a line. It's grounding and reminds me that certain things are still popularly considered uncivilised or taboo and we're not seriously contemplating THE PURGE.
Perhaps it has something to do with a deeper insecurity about being considered a 'wet blanket' as a female gamer? Cheers to those who do that emotional labour for edgy braggarts like me anyway. 8)

 

[Deleted member 888]

I don't think that it's true that non-violence is not fun and engaging in games. So, moving forward with that presumption, why is so much of game development and the video game industry, so focused on violence?
Also, while video games don't cause violence necessarily. Could they be normalizing and reinforcing violent emotions and feelings in many people, or worse, decreasing empathy and heightening a sense of violent competitiveness?

Click to shrink...

No

In a series of experiments, with more than 3,000 participants, the team demonstrated that video game concepts do not 'prime' players to behave in certain ways and that increasing the realism of violent video games does not necessarily increase aggression in game players.

The dominant model of learning in games is built on the idea that exposing players to concepts, such as violence in a game, makes those concepts easier to use in 'real life'. This is known as 'priming', and is thought to lead to changes in behaviour. Previous experiments on this effect, however, have so far provided mixed conclusions.

Researchers at the University of York expanded the number of participants in experiments, compared to studies that had gone before it, and compared different types of gaming realism to explore whether more conclusive evidence could be found.

Click to shrink...

Dr Zendle said: "We found that the priming of violent concepts, as measured by how many violent concepts appeared in the word fragment completion task, was not detectable. There was no difference in priming between the game that employed 'ragdoll physics' and the game that didn't, as well as no significant difference between the games that used 'real' and 'unreal' solider tactics.

"The findings suggest that there is no link between these kinds of realism in games and the kind of effects that video games are commonly thought to have on their players.

"Further study is now needed into other aspects of realism to see if this has the same result. What happens when we consider the realism of by-standing characters in the game, for example, and the inclusion of extreme content, such as torture?

"We also only tested these theories on adults, so more work is needed to understand whether a different effect is evident in children players."

Click to shrink...

https://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-eve...no-evidence-to-link-violence-and-video-games/

That being said I'm all for more good Animal Crossing clones. There are plenty of games out there to choose from. I recommend Yakuza OP, where everything is settled by brawling talking.

The gameplay loop of competition and striving for a goal is just met easily with combat, or in the case of sports games, winning a competition. It is what it is, as much as artistic ventures like Flower can sell well, they "sell well" within the budget it cost to make them. When you ramp up the budget of games you need to sell a good number of copies, and a gameplay loop of action/adventure/combat is simply something a large part of the market enjoy.

The world of make-believe allows a lot of crazy fantasy/roleplay and adventure you cannot do in real life, so it gets the dopamine rushing in the brain. You can go collect bugs and grow plants in real life if you want, you can't battle dragons, slay demons, hunt monsters and fly around on a jetpack blowing shit up. That's not to say Animal Crossing isn't fun, it is, it's just for a long time now some of the more outrageous or intense depictions of make-believe in games/film/books tickles the adventure and excitement factors in the brain.

GTA is the best selling game of all time, and it's understandable why even if some people hate it. What isn't valid is anyone trying to pin actual attrocities and real life behaviour on GTA unless there is tangible and credible scientific studies.

 

[PCPace]

I love the Splinter Cell series, through the vast majority of all except the sixth, you never have to kill anyone, or even knock anyone out of you are good

 

[Blade Wolf]

It's a great idea but that's gonna take up some resources and time to do with nothing in return.

Should we do it? Yes.

Will we do it? Probably not.

 

[Aaron D.]

Agreed 100% OP.

Conflict / Resolution in storytelling has been around since the start.

But the gaming medium's obsession with resolution through violence strikes me as over-focused, childish and droll.

Guess it's why my fave genres are narrative adventures, vehicle sims, colony sims & grand-strategy (where conflict & violence is at least abstracted pretty heavily).

These days violence in gaming feels synonymous with juvenile power fantasy wish fulfillment.

 

[Tickling]

Welcome to the mainstream. If non violent games, movies and other media was popular and make money then more of it would be getting made

 

[Zephy]

I'll admit I enjoy the daily life aspect of Persona 5 more than its dungeon part. I wouldn't have dropped the game if the dungeons were a third of their current length.

In Mass Effect games I enjoyed spending entire evenings exploring hubs, talking to people and stuff. I think the combat is necessary for the balance and rhythm of the game, but the game still works when there is very little of it.

 

[Skyfireblaze]

I personally don't have a problem with fictional violence at large and play games featuring some daily but I agree some more games in another direction would be quite interesting and welcome. Harvest Moon is one of my favorite video-games series and even when playing games where violence is a key part I sometimes caught myself just not wanting to progress in that direction and wanting to do different things. For example when playing Zelda Breath of the Wild I was actually more than happy just helping the villagers in Hateno Village, especially after finding out I could actually have my own house and working towards that. Same in Final Fantasy XIV, sometimes while playing I'm like you OP, sometimes I don't want to be the hero of light and forget about the Garlean Empire. I simply want to take the world in, chat with people, do NPC side-stories, work towards getting a house and just relax.

I know that quite some indie-games recently kind of try to appeal this niche and I'm curious to see where this goes from here.

 

[Deleted member 888]

Welcome to the mainstream. If non violent games, movies and other media was popular and make money then more of it would be getting made

Click to shrink...

A lot of them do get made, you normally just have to go down to lower budget titles or indie titles.

An Assassins Creed game where you simply talk to people, collect plants and do block puzzles, on the budget of a current AC game, would not make its money back let alone make a profit. The action and adventure gameplay loops in such an open world title are just the best fitting formula to sell millions in the mainstream market.

 

[Deleted member 888]

This also came out recently

A new, longer-term study of video game play from the Max Planck Institute for Human Development and Germany's University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf recently published in Molecular Psychiatry found that adults showed "no significant changes" on a wide variety of behavioral measures after two straight months of daily violent game play.

Click to shrink...

Most scientific studies on the effects of video game violence measure participants right after the completion of a gameplay session, when the adrenaline prompted by the on-screen action is likely still pumping. Researcher Simone Kuhn and her co-authors argue that "effects observed only for a few minutes after short sessions of video gaming are not representative of what society at large is actually interested in, namely how habitual violent video game play affects behavior on a more long-term basis."

To correct for the "priming" effects inherent in these other studies, researchers had 90 adult participants play either Grand Theft Auto V or The Sims 3 for at least 30 minutes every day over eight weeks (a control group played no games during the testing period). The adults chosen, who ranged from 18 to 45 years old, reported little to no video game play in the previous six months and were screened for pre-existing psychological problems before the tests.

The participants were subjected to a wide battery of 52 established questionnaires intended to measure "aggression, sexist attitudes, empathy, and interpersonal competencies, impulsivity-related constructs (such as sensation seeking, boredom proneness, risk taking, delay discounting), mental health (depressivity, anxiety) as well as executive control functions." The tests were administered immediately before and immediately after the two-month gameplay period and also two months afterward, in order to measure potential continuing effects.

Click to shrink...

Over 208 separate comparisons (52 tests; violent vs. non-violent and control groups; pre- vs. post- and two-months-later tests), only three subjects showed a statistically significant effect of the violent gameplay at a 95 percent confidence level. Pure chance would predict more than 10 of the 208 comparisons would be significant at that level, leading the researchers to conclude "that there were no detrimental effects of violent video game play."

Click to shrink...

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018...ta-causes-no-significant-changes-in-behavior/

Conclusion

Taken together, the findings of the present study show that an extensive game intervention over the course of 2 months did not reveal any specific changes in aggression, empathy, interpersonal competencies, impulsivity-related constructs, depressivity, anxiety or executive control functions; neither in comparison to an active control group that played a non-violent video game nor to a passive control group. We observed no effects when comparing a baseline and a post-training assessment, nor when focussing on more long-term effects between baseline and a follow-up interval 2 months after the participants stopped training. To our knowledge, the present study employed the most comprehensive test battery spanning a multitude of domains in which changes due to violent video games may have been expected. Therefore the present results provide strong evidence against the frequently debated negative effects of playing violent video games. This debate has mostly been informed by studies showing short-term effects of violent video games when tests were administered immediately after a short playtime of a few minutes; effects that may in large be caused by short-lived priming effects that vanish after minutes. The presented results will therefore help to communicate a more realistic scientific perspective of the real-life effects of violent video gaming. However, future research is needed to demonstrate the absence of effects of violent video gameplay in children.

Click to shrink...

I'd create the topic but I can't create topics anymore. Someone else might want to considering we're embroiled in recent drama with Conservatives trying to pin gun crime on games again.

 

[petran79]

Nowadays kids need a guardian or parent to buy video games, while adults pretend the games they buy are for their kids

 

[oni-link]

Nowadays kids need a guardian or parent to buy video games, while adults pretend the games they buy are for their kids

Click to shrink...

Reminds me of this:

 

[Jhey Cyphre]

I do wish this as well. This is why games like Fallout (the good ones anyhow, you know the ones I'm talking about) are so special to me. Yeah, the setting is depressing and lots of shady stuff goes down. But you don't have to be killing people left and right if you don't want to.

Unfortunately the mentally of keeping games violence focused has been around forever and not likely to change for a long time. I've been replaying FFIII (US) recently and there is no reason 99% of the combat in that game happens yet there is no attempt to give you anything more then that.

 

[PatMan]

Reminds me of this:

Click to shrink...

The actual audience for Pokémon should be a fat neckbeard. Never seen a well adjusted adult playing Pokémon.

 

[Chopchop]

I think for some games, the most interesting part is not the violence, but how you can get around it. I think the social engineering/negotiating/snooping stuff in Deus Ex games are the most interesting part of it, for example. I mean, you could get violent and some games are very good at that (like doom 2016), but some games are better for offering alternatives.

 

[gcwy]

This thread is unnecessary. Great thing about this medium is that it's able to provide completely separate experiences. We have a wide array of genres and themes in video games, some that wouldn't even be possible in other mediums. There's something for everyone.

Complaining about violent video games seems really counterproductive to the point you're making.

 

[KINGOFSHIBUYA Ltd.]

I agree that I want games without violence, but that's most because I think it provides more creative space to explore new things.

Splatoon 2 being a fast paced competitive shooter that I can play in front of my friend's kids, is nice, too.

This thread is unnecessary. Great thing about this medium is that it's able to provide completely separate experiences. We have a wide array of genres and themes in video games, some that wouldn't even be possible in other mediums. There's something for everyone.

Complaining about violent video games seems really counterproductive to the point you're making.

Click to shrink...

I didn't think they were complaining at all. Just explaining why they dont like violence in games, and what they prefer to do.

Furthermore, there being something for everyone is exactly the point of the thread. The OP wants more things.
More options. Specifically more options for what they like, but still, I didn't see the part where they said to take away violent games.

Show me otherwise, if I'm wrong.

 

[Heisenberg726]

The actual audience for Pokémon should be a fat neckbeard. Never seen a well adjusted adult playing Pokémon.

Click to shrink...

There's dozens of us. DOZENS.

 

[jph139]

Video game violence doesn't cause attitudes toward violence, but vice-versa. When you think of the genesis of the modern video game, in the 80s and 90s, you see male-dominated design teams drawing on male-dominated tropes of the era, which were... well, violent. Mainstream gaming has been iterating on this, from Contra to Doom to Call of Duty.

As the gaming industry is diversifying, we're seeing a growth in new ideas and new ways to interact with games. Most of this greoth is in the indie sector, but as time goes on, I think we're going to see violence chipped away at as the norm. It'll never go away, and there'll always be a place for it. But like with other mediums, I think it will become one piece of a much larger picture.

But people are just violent by nature. Many, if not most, have a desire to hurt things, even if they abhor the idea of things getting hurt. Video games are just one outlet of many for those natural, albeit ugly, impulses.

 

[Blade Wolf]

The actual audience for Pokémon should be a fat neckbeard. Never seen a well adjusted adult playing Pokémon.

Click to shrink...

fucking lol

 

[bionic77]

It probably does say something about us that Grand Theft Auto 5 is going to be the best selling console game of all time when its all said and done.

But it isn't just videogames.

Media in general glorifies violence.

Its probably just a sign of who we are as a people.

 

[DarkFlame92]

Could be that people crave for what they can't have. Most people in here have normal lives with non-violence and the most successful video games are the ones that are set in different worlds with different rules and most importantly,doing actions that are not gonna be criticized by society or punished by law

We all stop at a red light in the streets,but nobody stops at a red light in GTA. We hate with a passion some people in real life,but we would never kill them in real life. Yet the hated villaiin in a videogame,could go down with a headshot by "our" hand.

In general,I think video games offer something that most of us cannot experience in real life and violence,like gunfights,superpowers,brutal weapon combat etc is a big part of it

 

[saenima]

The actual audience for Pokémon should be a fat neckbeard. Never seen a well adjusted adult playing Pokémon.

Click to shrink...

I'm guessing you're a CoD fan.


As for the OP, there is plenty of choice for non-violent games luckily. You mostly won't be finding them within the AAA space though. Look at adventure and puzzle games, VN's, many platformers are non-violent as well.

 

[Funny Valentine]

Some of the greatest games of all time are puzzle games so you have a lot of options there.

 

[Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric]

Thats like saying bugs bunny is violent. Its so far removed from reality that enemies turning into stars could mean anything.

Click to shrink...

I could just as easily say the same thing about most 'realistic' violent games.

In the real world, you don't take multiple rounds from an automatic weapon, duck down behind cover, and regenerate your health.

Most games are far from an accurate simulation of reality, including those that purport to be realistic.

 

[rusty chrome]

I'm the opposite. I play games to do things I can't and will never do in real life, such as cutting people in half, disemboweling them, etc.

In The Witcher 3, always chose to kill anyone I didn't like.

Does that make me a violent person in real life? Well, I have no criminal record and am actually pretty peaceful. I love violent/gory video games the most though. There are plenty of non-violent games out there. Get those. I want my violent games.

 

[bionic77]

I'm guessing you're a CoD fan.

Click to shrink...

I am a parent of 7 year old twins so I know a ton of parents with kids in elementary school.

The picture of the little kid playing COD is 100% true. What seems to happen with a lot of these parents is the dad buys the console that HE wants and lets the kid play the games that he is into. So I know a lot of 7-9 year old children who play a ton of shit online.

 

[rochellepaws]

Very much agree. I find combat in games often to be tedious at best and sometimes problematic which makes me uncomfortable at worst. Even thinking about many of my favourite games series like Persona, Pokemon or Zelda and it's definitely the non-combat parts of those games I enjoy the most. I've had a similar experience in MMOs WoW and FFXIV as well where I get more fun out of collecting, crafting, selling and general social things than I do in dungeons or raids which feel quite grindy and tedious.
The more I think about it the more I feel like combat is just this part of games I tolerate because it's so pervasive and accepted rather than something I actually enjoy.

It's actually bizarre how fixated the hobby is with combat and violence and I've seen some games like Watch Dogs 2 which functions perfectly well with stealth, hacking and gadget based infiltration badly damaged with the needless addition of guns and violence to the mix. So much wasted potential and unexplored avenues.

 

[tencents]

Games without combat are generally boring to play.