Every year publishers and developers release new games where you shoot people in the face...
- Thread starter Deleted member 8593
- Start date
OP
OP
I'm not sure I understand these questions. Maybe it's different for other people but I feel pretty far removed from the action when reading a book or watching a video, whether it's fiction or otherwise. In any case, I do find those events also disturbing and I'm equally interested why these things fascinate us as well.
This might be on me if my OP doesn't make this clear but I'm not really asking for alternatives or for developers to change how they develop shooters. As I said, I am not really trying to make an argument here that these things are somehow affecting our actions in real-life.
A lot of the fun, at least for me, comes from the audiovisual feedback of shooting. Two of my favourite FPS, FEAR and DOOM, are extremely violent and I think a big part of their appeal would be lost if there was no gore and the enemies just went to sleep. I guess if I had to boil down my OP to a single question, it would not be "should these games be made?" but rather "why do we enjoy them?"
As long as its a work of fiction and doesn't lead on a very true IRL story events, its totally fine to shoot fictional people/enemies. Obviously the biggest difference is that whatever actions you're performing, are done so in a video game and not with an actual gun with an actual real bullet inside it. IMO no matter how deeply one realizes what he/she is doing as long as he/she isn't doing it to real people. Its TOTALLY fine. Ofcourse there should be a clear concept of how you perceive fictional stuff and don't mix it with IRL stuff.
Humans are hard-wired to find violence and conquering an enemy enjoyable or at least satisfying.
Conquering evil is portrayed in many societies, myths, etc. as glorious, even in a situation that oversimplifies a more nuanced reality (terrorists being a great example). In particular, military conquest, soldiers, etc. are revered in the US.
Most people aren't allowed by society to be violent, and video games are a zero risk way to indulge tribalistic desire for warfare. Also a great way for folks to live out power fantasies when real life may not let them exert much power.
It's human nature and it appeals to base instincts we could really do without, but it is what it is. It's fun and it's not generally harmful outside of spreading military propaganda. Most people will never commit a murder.
On the other hand discrimination and objectification are also prevalent in games and I know lots of people that do that shit every day.
Conquering evil is portrayed in many societies, myths, etc. as glorious, even in a situation that oversimplifies a more nuanced reality (terrorists being a great example). In particular, military conquest, soldiers, etc. are revered in the US.
Most people aren't allowed by society to be violent, and video games are a zero risk way to indulge tribalistic desire for warfare. Also a great way for folks to live out power fantasies when real life may not let them exert much power.
It's human nature and it appeals to base instincts we could really do without, but it is what it is. It's fun and it's not generally harmful outside of spreading military propaganda. Most people will never commit a murder.
On the other hand discrimination and objectification are also prevalent in games and I know lots of people that do that shit every day.
I've been plaing shooters since the early 90s and I've still never fired a real gun. Zero interest.
I guess violence just pushes the right buttons in some primitive part of our brains. It's prevalent in all forms of media really.
I love my brutal violent and full of gore game from time to time, but the shooting genre both 3rd person and 1st person is something that usually makes me drop the interest in the game as soon as its announced. Really wish more devs had the liberty to start creating new things and game mechanics instead of giving a gun to the MC and then have it to kill all the NPCs in a room to progress forward.
This is a reason i also loved David Cage games, and was happy to see new devs starting to follow this genre of narrative games, like Untill Dawn, Life is Strange and some others.
This is a reason i also loved David Cage games, and was happy to see new devs starting to follow this genre of narrative games, like Untill Dawn, Life is Strange and some others.
Save for the lactose intolerant, most of us can eat a bunch of pizza without suffering massive consequences.
Regarding the question of why gunfighting is such a prevalent premise in gaming, I think it's because shooting a gun translates much, much more intuitively to pressing a button or trigger (triggers even made it onto controllers, how about that) on a controller than basically any other type of combat.
Sure, you can press a button to swing a sword or throw a punch but those actions can be much more varied in real life. Do you swing your sword down, sideways, thrust, do you punch with an uppercut, a hook, a jab, all of those things have so much more nuance and variety than most guns, where you literally point and shoot.
So it's just a much more intuitive way to do combat in a game.
Sure, you can press a button to swing a sword or throw a punch but those actions can be much more varied in real life. Do you swing your sword down, sideways, thrust, do you punch with an uppercut, a hook, a jab, all of those things have so much more nuance and variety than most guns, where you literally point and shoot.
So it's just a much more intuitive way to do combat in a game.
I live in a country where gun violence isn't very prominent, so shooting people in the face is just as fucked up fantasy to me as slashing people in the gut with a broadsword. But yeah, if I do live in a country where tens of thousands of real people got shot every year, and thousands of real people are free to buy and carry guns (openly or discreetly) in their daily lives, I don't know if I can appreciate the FPS/TPS genre in the same way.
You can take it even further if you want. Why does every game need you to defeat the enemy with violence? Even Zelda have you slashing your enemy to pieces and Mario stomping on creatures (who are usually minding their own business) to death?
In media you need some sort of conflict and most of the time that conflict is resolved by vanquishing the enemy. Guess you'd have to start chipping away at that premise, and make it popular in the mainstream to change things.
I personally don't mind if it isn't overly gratuitous. But other types of games are welcome.
In media you need some sort of conflict and most of the time that conflict is resolved by vanquishing the enemy. Guess you'd have to start chipping away at that premise, and make it popular in the mainstream to change things.
I personally don't mind if it isn't overly gratuitous. But other types of games are welcome.
I think violence not only sells, but more importantly it's much harder to make a satisfactory experience where you shake someone's hand and get to know them versus one where you shoot them.
I also think part of the problem is the lack of trying (from large publishers specifically, we've got tons of great stuff from indie games).
I also think part of the problem is the lack of trying (from large publishers specifically, we've got tons of great stuff from indie games).
Most action possibilities will involve violence. Or sports, which could be in a way a form of violence with rules.
And games really take advantage of putting you in control of some form of action.
Like it was said above, there is violence even in Mario.
Hell, even in Rocked League you can blow the opponent's car.
And games really take advantage of putting you in control of some form of action.
Like it was said above, there is violence even in Mario.
Hell, even in Rocked League you can blow the opponent's car.
The problem with these topics is that there is no good answer, and that scares people. Hell, it scares me.
Nature vs Nurture, Media effect on people, human nature or just basic enjoyment of things in a simulated fashion far detached from reality versus living a fantasy through gaming, etc. It's all so muddled and grey and that's why I don't try to think about it too much.
People can argue desensitization and other things, but ultimately you can have the child of a drunk abuser become a noble soul or have someone who's never had a violent outburst in their life go on a killing spree. It sucks, but there just isn't any logical consistency to life.
Nature vs Nurture, Media effect on people, human nature or just basic enjoyment of things in a simulated fashion far detached from reality versus living a fantasy through gaming, etc. It's all so muddled and grey and that's why I don't try to think about it too much.
People can argue desensitization and other things, but ultimately you can have the child of a drunk abuser become a noble soul or have someone who's never had a violent outburst in their life go on a killing spree. It sucks, but there just isn't any logical consistency to life.
I would say things like COD or Destiny feel more like tag and hide and seek than shooting a weapon. But things like Doom and Gears I do find juvenile and overly violent for violence sake and it's pretty hard turnoff.
You aren't wrong. And now that gfx are getting more life like, it turns me right off. People seem to like their gore kill animations, but for me the violence in things like the tlou2 trailers make me feel ill. Next gen with even better graphics and power so this stuff looks even more real...yeah getting too old i guess.
Maybe it also helps reinforce the lesson that violence solves conflict, like with every superhero movie. Good for a war-like nation like the US i guess, but i'd like a peaceful planet one day though.
Yeah I haven't played them this gen at all, just going by what I remember from X360 days. I'm sure the realism is dialed up a lot more now.
It's the year 2019 and we're still killing people just because a 2000-year old book says the voice in your head wants you to. This says a lot about our society.
This.
I also find myself not want INT any game that has excessive violence/gore.
I think it also has to do with mass shootings being a regular occurrence in the US now. When SA was out the idea of of murdering a bunch of civilians was a ridiculous fantasy that seemed silly and goofy because it didn't have overt parallels in real life. Now people start unloading automatic rifles into crowds of innocents weekly if not more and it's hard to not feel gross when you virtually act it out.
Nothing feels better than a good head shot with extra blood spraying out everywhere.
Games like Gears are so great for stress relief.
Games like Gears are so great for stress relief.
because i save bullets. i especially need them in certain situations in days gone which i'm playing right now.
The only games I play with "realistic" guns are Resident Evil and Metal Gear.
In RE they're zombies so I guess it's kinda okay.
In MGS I try to kill as few people as possible... partially because it makes the game easier.
But yeah, I share a similar discomfort with simulated gun violence.
In RE they're zombies so I guess it's kinda okay.
In MGS I try to kill as few people as possible... partially because it makes the game easier.
But yeah, I share a similar discomfort with simulated gun violence.
Gang violence has been around forever, so no, GTA has never been a fantasy. It has always mirrored thing that happen in real life
This discussion and our medium in general will come into massive debate next-gen as games like The Last of us Part two and just the general visual fidelity leap that will come along with going into the next console cycle.
Developers and publishers are going to have to make some hard calls, as the visual realism ratchets up, and games become even more cinematic, and the divide of the uncanny valley begins to narrow, I'd imagine violence being left as is in most games will visually be just as jarring as the alternative. Meaning what's worse for the developer or audience? Showing a character that looks, walks, and talks realistically, yet doesn't bleed or react to injury (regardless of how) in a realistic way? Violence in movies and shows depict ultra violence- watch the latest Jon Wick, or even something as classic as Pulp Fiction, or Saving Private Ryan -gruesome violence up on screen with people being sliced open, heads exploding, and blood flowing. All in a flash of light and mostly driven by purpose and justification; either through narrative, plot, or character development. The violence usually has a purpose; or if removed; makes the story less impactful. You can't really say the same for games.... It's uncharted territory for the industry; and it'll be interesting to see how it matures. Especially if the laws of the land push or nudge the industry in any significant ways.
Is this something society wants or needs in their games? Cinema has battled for defining that line for decades - choosing how violence, and sex, in film is consumed. With films breaking ground, pushing beyond boundaries, and moving the medium forward. Gaming as a form of entertainment hasn't had as many milestones as film, but it's compounding year over year as games are becoming more socially acceptable, have potentially a wider audience than any other type of media short of books, and in terms of it's lifespan- still is in it's adolescence as a medium.
Interesting times ahead for sure.
Developers and publishers are going to have to make some hard calls, as the visual realism ratchets up, and games become even more cinematic, and the divide of the uncanny valley begins to narrow, I'd imagine violence being left as is in most games will visually be just as jarring as the alternative. Meaning what's worse for the developer or audience? Showing a character that looks, walks, and talks realistically, yet doesn't bleed or react to injury (regardless of how) in a realistic way? Violence in movies and shows depict ultra violence- watch the latest Jon Wick, or even something as classic as Pulp Fiction, or Saving Private Ryan -gruesome violence up on screen with people being sliced open, heads exploding, and blood flowing. All in a flash of light and mostly driven by purpose and justification; either through narrative, plot, or character development. The violence usually has a purpose; or if removed; makes the story less impactful. You can't really say the same for games.... It's uncharted territory for the industry; and it'll be interesting to see how it matures. Especially if the laws of the land push or nudge the industry in any significant ways.
Is this something society wants or needs in their games? Cinema has battled for defining that line for decades - choosing how violence, and sex, in film is consumed. With films breaking ground, pushing beyond boundaries, and moving the medium forward. Gaming as a form of entertainment hasn't had as many milestones as film, but it's compounding year over year as games are becoming more socially acceptable, have potentially a wider audience than any other type of media short of books, and in terms of it's lifespan- still is in it's adolescence as a medium.
Interesting times ahead for sure.
Last edited:
Honest answer. I enjoy conflicts in video games. Flat out. I enjoy the stories they create, and sometimes conflict is violent. I don't like violence in real life but I really enjoy turning demons in Doom or grubs in Gears into mush with my shotgun. It's only fun and entertaining because it's not real. That's my best defense, really. You're asking me to define a process my brain handled automatically; not mixing up fact with fiction lol
I would say that the dominant country in terms of mass market media is America and we definitely glorify violence in our movies and games.
India makes a ton of movies and they make violent movies as well, but instead of explosions they seem to have mandatory dance scenes and music in every movie.
And I imagine other counties making movies are not as obsessed with violence as Americans are in general.
Yet in places like Europe, games like GTA and Call of Duty are still super popular, yet they don't have the same violence problems.
I don't know if the media causes people to be violent.
I am just saying Americans really like to glorify it. Why and what that's means I don't know.
