Letting children die horribly seems to be the new 'hook'. (Now includes video, due to popular demand

[Gindil]

A metaphor? Please...
That's a child being torn up and then killed. Zombie or not. By her father.
That's no longer a metaphor.

Horror is most often a metaphor.

I decided to sit down and watch the trailer, because it's not cool to defend something as art which I have not yet actually experienced.

So let's go through what happens. It's sort of done similiar to Momento. You have one sequence of events going backwards, and another series of events going forwards, both simultaneously, until they meet up at the same event.

The scene going backwards starts with a child on the pavement, which as it turns out, has fallen out of a window, because someone she was biting has tossed her off him. She had lept off the bed, when she was placed there by the man (let's assume he's her father) who had pulled her from a hallway filled with zombies... all the while he's fighting them off heroicly.

Going forward, it's that girl running from those same zombies, who then catch her, claw at her a bit, but she is saved (as it turns out too late) by her father.

I could not walk away from that trailer and not be emotionally affected. There's a sense of futility, of fighting an endless mindless machine, that will grab you and make you a part of it, whether you fight it or not. That's standard zombie fare.

What stuck with me tho, was that girl running for her life, to be saved by her father, who is making a heroic, desperate stance to save her and his wife from these mindless animals... but it is for nothing, and she has become like them. And he has to make the decision... one that will haunt him should he survive this. He has to do something inhumane to survive.

Yes, it's an advertisement. And advertisements carry messages to encourage the purchase of the game. This advertisement was... different. It was designed not to sell the game based on being hardcore... but it carries a subtle promise. This is not just 'fighting zombies.' The advertisement is tapping into primal emotions... fear. Not fear of zombies, not fear of death, not fear of the unsightly.

Fear of those you love turning on you. Fear of love being lost at the whim of fate. The fear of innocence turned into hatred and destruction. That unfair hand of god coming down and saying that all the pillars you hold dear, all the things you take for granted can be taken away and turned on you... and that you will be forced to do horrible things to those you love because of it... or cease to exist.

It challenges us and it forces us to face some very deep questions about ourselves. Would you do the same as he? Could you throw your daughter out the window if she was turned into an unstoppable mindless killing machine? If you could... would this linger with you? Could you put that aside to survive, or would you give up and die with her? His wife is also there... that complicates things too. Now he has to choose between the undead likeness of his daughter, and his wife who is very much alive.

How does a father face himself after that? Not only did he toss his daughter out a window, he failed to protect the one person in the world it is his duty to protect above all others. Not because society tells you, but because it's part of what defines a father.

Now, I can't and won't assume anyone else came away from it with these questions, or even looked at it in that amount of depth... nor do I believe people should. But I have... and I believe many of that emotional response is intentional on some level.

I cannot walk away from any media... commercial or otherwise... and ask questions of such importance, of such gravitas... questions that in answering, reveal my soul to myself... and NOT come to the conclusion that it is art. Is it shocking? Yes. Is it horrifying? Yes.

And it is that horror that -makes- it art... this commercial's an artistic expression of one of life's greatest tragedies: Losing a child. Presented in a raw... visceral way. There's no euphemism. And... I am convinced that the message would not be the same if it were an adult. If it were some woman and he were protecting a child... we might not make the husband/wife connection. But in this we automatically do... and that meaning is immediately understood and internalized. Even if she isn't his daughter, we grasp that he is protecting her, that he has taken on, for that moment in time, the paternal duties of protecting a child against violence.

For the message to work, it had to be a child.

It worked. I am horrified. And it is art. And I will defend it.

...

Ya know, having watched the trailer and watching what happened and the bonds the zed horde severed in this family with two quick bites, I'm apt to agree with this sentiment.

But I'll go one further. Look at what happens to his wife. In mere moments, this man has lost everything and had it taken all away because fate was a ***** to him. The one person he had meant to protect jumped him. His wife has no chance of not dying to the horde (she'd fallen down). The two things that it means to be the protector of the family are gone...

That is an artistic use of license.

 

[Woodsey]

If a book, film or TV show featured this, would this thread even exist?

Probably not.

The trailer Dead Island trailer was designed to elicit an emotional response and, if they've got a good marketing team, get the atmosphere of the actual game across.

its obvious isn't it? lots of kids play games, how to draw the kids into the story: include a kid in it, so they can identify.

And have nightmares.

Don't let a 9-year-old child play an 18 rated zombie survival game then.

I doubt children will even feature in the game proper, knowing how much people will piss themselves over it in moral outrage.

At 18 cert, it's not going to 'pop' onto your TV, you're not going to 'accidentally' come upon it, and with digital cable and the way media is consumed nowadays anyways, if you're in a position where you come upon it, you have the same right everyone else does.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bwtr_-4vz6g : Viewable easily with any age. Don't even have to sign in.

And if it offends you, you should have the right to change the channel. Where your rights stop is when the artistic media in question does NOT harm society itself (and no, offense is not harm), at that point you do not have ANY moral authority to say that I cannot watch it.

Ok. Two main points.
Offense is not harm is an opinion. Not a fact.
Now, I know you read my post, because you quoted it, so you'll remember the bit where I said
"If you want to watch it, fine."

Horror is meant to present horrifying images... and they WILL offend someone. But you have the choice to not watch it. Take that choice away from others, and you've enacted something even MORE horrifying... the censorship of a valid art form, just because you don't like the metaphor.

A metaphor? Please...
That's a child being torn up and then killed. Zombie or not. By her father.
That's no longer a metaphor.

I take it you wrote in to the makers of The Walking Dead (I guess the scene is also in the comic) and blasted them for having Rick shoot a little girl who'd turn into a zombie?

And no, it's not a metaphor at all, it's just them getting across the idea that people aren't safe and that this is what the tone of the game will be.

As for the trailer being easy to view, I'm going to bet you're infinitely more offended/disturbed by it than any 10-year-old, and you're likely going to have to specifically look for it to find it on Youtube anyway.

Games will never be as accepted as much as films, TV and books if people like yourself (a gamer I'm assuming, since you're on here) slip into the same pitfalls as people outside of the industry.

 

[Wondermint13]

Maybe it is because children are the most annoying thing on this earth?

This. For some reason that is the only thing that annoys the piss out of me when playing Fallout 3 and Fallout NV.
I loved the fact that you could kill the children.

Should I be calling the FBI?

Haha...just kidding. [font-size="2"]*Gets phone*[/font]

Clearly somebody who doesnt have kids...

You wouldnt need to call the FBI, just repeat those words to any parent and watch them kick the shit out of him instead.. Like my girlfriend.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Lots of stuff I agree with

Ok, given I'm a horror afficionado, I think a lot of what you're saying is perfectly true.

And givien the number of replies, I think this is going to be a long post. But here's where I differ:

This seems to be a calculated shock vid, rather than an expression of art. There are serious flaws in it from a game advertisement point that I could deal with if it was simply a piece of art; but it's not. It's directly advertising a game, and it lies.

First of all, there's the image of zombies. This isn't the shambling bureaucracy/alienation metaphor that was used in Night of the Living Dead, but more the rapid zombies (hysteria/hydrophobia(rabies) metaphor) used in 28 Days Later; but how fast do they transform? Well, the young girl gets bitten at 0:45 and is a zombie at 1:58 (and that's in slow motion) : That means the infection rate takes place faster than the human body stops working.

That means, in game terms, that these zombies one-hit kill. Likely in a real game? Nope.

Hold on a minute:

I take it you wrote in to the makers of The Walking Dead (I guess the scene is also in the comic) and blasted them for having Rick shoot a little girl who'd turn into a zombie?

Nope, because I've already seen Dawn of the Dead [http://zombie.wikia.com/wiki/Dawn_of_the_Dead] where the pregnant Fran is supposed to die, and they re-cut it to make them a hero. (Same level of rubbish as the remake of "I am Legend") She should have died. There are also children zombies in Day of the Dead, and one of my favourite episodes of Who is The Empty Child. I've no problem with child zombies except...

As the film progresses, we're treated to numerous emotional crutch points where we're "reminded" of the child being part of the family?

In game terms, are we going to be treated to these and have to kill off "our family"? Likely? Nope.

At the beginning/end of the film, the child is thrown threw a plate glass window and drops two stories. Instant death for a human child (and almost certainly a rupturing of the body), but for a zombie? Nothing.

But it kills her. There's no final scene where she gets up. So that scene is there purely for emotional hook and is not part of the game mechanics.

Now let's think about the protagonist in this game. It's possible we'll be playing the father, but I doubt that all the players will be, especially as we're treated to shots of a woman holding them off by the pool in the media.

So, for most players, this trailer will have no effect on the actual gameplay. The emotional involvement built up is purely for advertisement. We're selling this game on infanticide.

Finally, we have the previews around.

Publisher Deep Silver and developer Techland recently showed me an early build of Dead Island, and the zombies were horrifying in their varying states of decay. With each blow, their already sloughing flesh fell away in sprays of blood, revealing layers of muscle underneath. The publisher describes Dead Island as dark, twisted and gritty, and the tiny sliver I've seen seems to support those claims.

Although the player starts out as a simple tourist with minimal zombie-killing skills, his traits will improve along the way, thanks to a mini role-playing system built into the game.

So, we're looking at a minimal weapon, melee-centric constant attack of one-hit-kill zombies.

Does that sound like what you've seen in the trailer? Does any of the emotional impact of the trailer (like loss, innocence, betrayal) get brought into the game?
In simple terms: Do you have to kill your own little daughter?

Doubtful, isn't it?

When will this:

actually play any part of the game experience other than to unsettle you?

At the moment it looks simply voyeuristic; and capitalizing on infanticide.

Many of us would love to think of us as Avenging Angels (see Dead Rising), but if you'd gone through the torment described above, would there be any "game" in that?

Would you want to play a game where you're trapped in a Chilean Mine trying to dig your way out? Or recover from the floods in Louisiana? No, because it would be offensive to some and boring to others.

That's my feelings on it anyway. Art is there to inform, not perform.

Again, you're basically saying that your ideas of worth and merit are somehow better than everyone else's, and as such you should have say over everyone else.

I'm slightly bemused at how people are trying to set me up as condemning the idea of showing children as zombies. It's happened many times before and I've seen (and enjoyed) films where children are torn limb from limb. (Hell, I loved Bad Taste)

If something is on prime time which you find distatestful, it's probably because other people want to watch it.

That's a very flawed assumption. Something is on prime time because they've paid for it to be on prime time. I am asking for the choice to NOT watch it.

If you're denying me that, then you're the one censoring. I have stated many times that I don't have a problem with people watching/playing that game, it's just I find it strictly offensive and want a way where I can not run into it again.

This mindset is exactly the same mindset used by the evangelical religious to try and foist their views on others: "I believe I am 100% in the right, so therefore I must make everyone else accept what I believe"

Sorry Jeffers, on a lot of things I'll agree with you, but that was uncalled for and insulting. Zombie Children have been around for a long time but I do not want to play a game that uses death-porn to promote itself. FFS, Watchmen sees a child butchered and fed to dogs, BUT it changes Rorschach. It's central to his struggle, not just some tacky voyeuristic carnage.

 

[Woodsey]

Lots of stuff I agree with

Ok, given I'm a horror afficionado, I think a lot of what you're saying is perfectly true.

And givien the number of replies, I think this is going to be a long post. But here's where I differ:

This seems to be a calculated shock vid, rather than an expression of art. There are serious flaws in it from a game advertisement point that I could deal with if it was simply a piece of art; but it's not. It's directly advertising a game, and it lies.

First of all, there's the image of zombies. This isn't the shambling bureaucracy/alienation metaphor that was used in Night of the Living Dead, but more the rapid zombies (hysteria/hydrophobia(rabies) metaphor) used in 28 Days Later; but how fast do they transform? Well, the young girl gets bitten at 0:45 and is a zombie at 1:58 (and that's in slow motion) : That means the infection rate takes place faster than the human body stops working.

That means, in game terms, that these zombies one-hit kill. Likely in a real game? Nope.

Hold on a minute:

I take it you wrote in to the makers of The Walking Dead (I guess the scene is also in the comic) and blasted them for having Rick shoot a little girl who'd turn into a zombie?

Nope, because I've already seen Dawn of the Dead [http://zombie.wikia.com/wiki/Dawn_of_the_Dead] where the pregnant Fran is supposed to die, and they re-cut it to make them a hero. (Same level of rubbish as the remake of "I am Legend") She should have died. There are also children zombies in Day of the Dead, and one of my favourite episodes of Who is The Empty Child. I've no problem with child zombies except...

As the film progresses, we're treated to numerous emotional crutch points where we're "reminded" of the child being part of the family?

In game terms, are we going to be treated to these and have to kill off "our family"? Likely? Nope.

At the beginning/end of the film, the child is thrown threw a plate glass window and drops two stories. Instant death for a human child (and almost certainly a rupturing of the body), but for a zombie? Nothing.

But it kills her. There's no final scene where she gets up. So that scene is there purely for emotional hook and is not part of the game mechanics.

Now let's think about the protagonist in this game. It's possible we'll be playing the father, but I doubt that all the players will be, especially as we're treated to shots of a woman holding them off by the pool in the media.

So, for most players, this trailer will have no effect on the actual gameplay. The emotional involvement built up is purely for advertisement. We're selling this game on infanticide.

Finally, we have the previews around.

Publisher Deep Silver and developer Techland recently showed me an early build of Dead Island, and the zombies were horrifying in their varying states of decay. With each blow, their already sloughing flesh fell away in sprays of blood, revealing layers of muscle underneath. The publisher describes Dead Island as dark, twisted and gritty, and the tiny sliver I've seen seems to support those claims.

Although the player starts out as a simple tourist with minimal zombie-killing skills, his traits will improve along the way, thanks to a mini role-playing system built into the game.

So, we're looking at a minimal weapon, melee-centric constant attack of one-hit-kill zombies.

Does that sound like what you've seen in the trailer? Does any of the emotional impact of the trailer (like loss, innocence, betrayal) get brought into the game?
In simple terms: Do you have to kill your own little daughter?

Doubtful, isn't it?

When will this:

actually play any part of the game experience other than to unsettle you?

At the moment it looks simply voyeuristic; and capitalizing on infanticide.

Many of us would love to think of us as Avenging Angels (see Dead Rising), but if you'd gone through the torment described above, would there be any "game" in that?

Would you want to play a game where you're trapped in a Chilean Mine trying to dig your way out? Or recover from the floods in Louisiana? No, because it would be offensive to some and boring to others.

That's my feelings on it anyway. Art is there to inform, not perform.

Again, you're basically saying that your ideas of worth and merit are somehow better than everyone else's, and as such you should have say over everyone else.

I'm slightly bemused at how people are trying to set me up as condemning the idea of showing children as zombies. It's happened many times before and I've seen (and enjoyed) films where children are torn limb from limb. (Hell, I loved Bad Taste)

If something is on prime time which you find distatestful, it's probably because other people want to watch it.

That's a very flawed assumption. Something is on prime time because they've paid for it to be on prime time. I am asking for the choice to NOT watch it.

If you're denying me that, then you're the one censoring. I have stated many times that I don't have a problem with people watching/playing that game, it's just I find it strictly offensive and want a way where I can not run into it again.

This mindset is exactly the same mindset used by the evangelical religious to try and foist their views on others: "I believe I am 100% in the right, so therefore I must make everyone else accept what I believe"

Sorry Jeffers, on a lot of things I'll agree with you, but that was uncalled for and insulting. Zombie Children have been around for a long time but I do not want to play a game that uses death-porn to promote itself. FFS, Watchmen sees a child butchered and fed to dogs, BUT it changes Rorschach. It's central to his struggle, not just some tacky voyeuristic carnage.

You're completely missing the trailer's point.

That is, to convey tone. You don't need to actually do anything similar to the specifics in the trailer to share that, and assuming the game's well written, that's something that should be upheld.

How about we see the actual game before you tell yourself the trailer bears no resemblance to it? Maybe it won't and they'll pull a Halo (all the "emotional" shit goes into the trailers), maybe you'll be crying every 5 minutes in the game because it's so powerful.

Who knows? As it stands, we can at best infer that the trailer has been made to display the tone of the game. You can't just make stuff up to suit your point:

"one-hit-kill zombies."

"Does that sound like what you've seen in the trailer? Does any of the emotional impact of the trailer (like loss, innocence, betrayal) get brought into the game? "

YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA. All you've done is copy two paragraphs from a preview. In fact, this line can be seen to contradict your one-hit-kill assumption:

"With each blow, their already sloughing flesh fell away in sprays of blood, revealing layers of muscle underneath."

Your argument that the other guy is trying to censor you is also illogical at best. He's censoring you because you're not being forced to watch something that you don't want to? WHAT?

If you don't want to come across it, change the damn channel/don't see the film/don't buy the game.

And yes, it is an advertisement because it's a trailer, soo... What? Can you not show any devastation? Not hint at the tone of the product? Not provide an idea of what's going to happen, of what they're going to be faced with?

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

You're completely missing the trailer's point.

A trailer's point is to sell the game. Not to put people off.

How about we see the actual game before you tell yourself the trailer bears no resemblance to it? Maybe it won't and they'll pull a Halo (all the "emotional" shit goes into the trailers), maybe you'll be crying every 5 minutes in the game because it's so powerful.

Either way, it's no longer a game I want to play.

Your argument that the other guy is trying to censor you is also illogical at best. He's censoring you because you're not being forced to watch something that you don't want to? WHAT?

If you don't want to come across it, change the damn channel/don't see the film/don't buy the game.

So, anything's allowed because people can always turn away? That's not how media works. That's why we've got ESRB ratings. That's why the Governator is trying to ban games at the moment.

And yes, it is an advertisement because it's a trailer, soo... What? Can you not show any devastation? Not hint at the tone of the product? Not provide an idea of what's going to happen, of what they're going to be faced with?

Because the trailer shows nothing of that. It shows a Father killing his Daughter in reverse. That's the sort of thing that is going to be plastered across all the gaming sites I like to look at.
That's what upsets me. That's why I'm upset. That's what I'm trying to avoid.

Arachnophobes quite rightly don't want to see big pictures of hairy spiders across their news sources, and get quite offended when one pops up; even if they can turn away. I have a completely rational fear of seeing loved ones hacked to pieces.

As do a lot of other people.

Edit: I'll point you back to the OT

Letting children die horribly seems to be the new 'hook'.

I don't like that hook. I'm not censoring that hook, I just don't want to be exposed to it.

 

[akibawall95]

You're completely missing the trailer's point.

That is, to convey tone. You don't need to actually do anything similar to the specifics in the trailer to share that, and assuming the game's well written, that's something that should be upheld.

How about we see the actual game before you tell yourself the trailer bears no resemblance to it? Maybe it won't and they'll pull a Halo (all the "emotional" shit goes into the trailers), maybe you'll be crying every 5 minutes in the game because it's so powerful.

Who knows? As it stands, we can at best infer that the trailer has been made to display the tone of the game. You can't just make stuff up to suit your point:

"one-hit-kill zombies."

"Does that sound like what you've seen in the trailer? Does any of the emotional impact of the trailer (like loss, innocence, betrayal) get brought into the game? "

YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA. All you've done is copy two paragraphs from a preview. In fact, this line can be seen to contradict your one-hit-kill assumption:

"With each blow, their already sloughing flesh fell away in sprays of blood, revealing layers of muscle underneath."

Your argument that the other guy is trying to censor you is also illogical at best. He's censoring you because you're not being forced to watch something that you don't want to? WHAT?

If you don't want to come across it, change the damn channel/don't see the film/don't buy the game.

And yes, it is an advertisement because it's a trailer, soo... What? Can you not show any devastation? Not hint at the tone of the product? Not provide an idea of what's going to happen, of what they're going to be faced with?

I completely agree with this statement. A trailer is meant to set the tone or to let the player know what the game is about, thus helping people know if they should buy it or not.

 

[Blaster395]

Its simple. In Mario, you have to save a defenseless princess. In this game, you presumably get the opportunity to protect a defenseless child.
There have been stories that involve this theme since the beginning of humanity, where someone is tasked with looking after someone who is helpless.

 

[Bigsmith]

Am I the only one who couldn't tell if that video was going forwards or backwards?

 

[Phoenixlight]

Edit2: WARNING. Apparently, some people found this video very depressing. If you think you may be one of these people, please contact a doctor before viewing. If a doctor is unavalible, please feel free to try this 'happy' version of said trailer.
http://www.tubedubber.com/#Bwtr_-4vz6g:0N1_0SUGlDQ:0:100:17:5:true

Seriously? are you that stupid and insensitive that you can't understand why some people might find the trailer unpleasent?

 

[Kopikatsu]

Edit2: WARNING. Apparently, some people found this video very depressing. If you think you may be one of these people, please contact a doctor before viewing. If a doctor is unavalible, please feel free to try this 'happy' version of said trailer.
http://www.tubedubber.com/#Bwtr_-4vz6g:0N1_0SUGlDQ:0:100:17:5:true

Seriously? are you that stupid and insensitive that you can't understand why some people might find the trailer unpleasent?

Stupid? No.

Insensitive? You know it.

You have to admit, though...that trailer set to Plants and Zombies is awesome. The guy even knocks his daughter off RIGHT when the dolphin thing goes! Then the screen door shield...it just goes so well.

 

[InnerRebellion]

Honestly, what is it about children that makes them so special and sacred? I wouldn't even bat an eye if a game told me to shoot a kid; I'd go ahead and do it. Would I do it in the real world? Depends on the situation. Will killing this child give me the cures to all the diseases in the world? Yes? Bullet into the kid. Will killing him do anything at all? No? He lives.

 

[Squidwogdog]

Ok, not to sound insensitive, but that was awesome. I am seriously considering following this game now. Yeah the kid dying was tragic, but I think it was tastefully done(?). awesome trailer.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Look at all the topics about Dead Island's trailer popping up.

Hate to say 'I told you so', buuuuut...so much free publicity. SO. MUCH.

That being said, I suppose it was rather brilliant of the producer to go with that trailer, since the point of an advertisement is to make the product known, aaaaand...well, it is certainly known now, isn't it?

 

[Rhinzual26]

Look at all the topics about Dead Island's trailer popping up.

Hate to say 'I told you so', buuuuut...so much free publicity. SO. MUCH.

That being said, I suppose it was rather brilliant of the producer to go with that trailer, since the point of an advertisement is to make the product known, aaaaand...well, it is certainly known now, isn't it?

You think they'll ever make an updated re-release of Wasteland, even with that one potential scenario still there?

 

[Broken Orange]

This is just a teaser trailer to get people exicited about the game. And in this case, get people talking about it.

 

[warrcry13]

I liked the video. Makes you feel a bit of sympathy, and shows some vulnerability. Unlike most zombie game characters.