No Violence needed
- Thread starter That Greek Guy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Harvest The Moon is a very good series with no violence. (You can hit your animals with tools, but that reduces hearts and no one wants that).
Let me try to think of games I have enjoyed where you are not violent:
-Portal
-Portal 2 (Unless if you include shoving over machine gun turrets as "violent")
-Air Control iOS (there is violence if you fail - mid air collision - but that's not the intention)
-VVVVVV
-Dirt 3
-Super Meat Boy
Borderline:
-LA Noire (isn't it possible to play through the game never drawing your gun?)
-Batman: Arkham City (never use any lethal force)
-Think you can also play through Deus Ex HR with no kills
-Portal
-Portal 2 (Unless if you include shoving over machine gun turrets as "violent")
-Air Control iOS (there is violence if you fail - mid air collision - but that's not the intention)
-VVVVVV
-Dirt 3
-Super Meat Boy
Borderline:
-LA Noire (isn't it possible to play through the game never drawing your gun?)
-Batman: Arkham City (never use any lethal force)
-Think you can also play through Deus Ex HR with no kills
Games without violence?
Old School: Pitfall, Pong, ... does Circus Atari count? That's more like a workman's comp-eligible accident when you splat.
I still think that Bioshock would have made an awesome adventure game, with no need for violence - but it is what it is.
Frictional Games' games (Penumbra, Amnesia) don't require that you kill anyone - or at least its not a core part of gameplay.
Why is violence prevalent in games? Tension.
As an official NaNoWriMo winner. I can tell you that the best way to create a good story is to have tension. The most thrilling kind of tension is the threat of death. Now, you can create that tension with an industrial machine that can crush your skull - but you won't get much satisfaction from breaking a machine.
Portal was an awesome game - which did have a little violence. However, the automated sentries did NOT create nearly as much tension as confinement in the test laboratories did. Remember how cool those little hideaways were when you first found them. They were cool because somebody got out! From the player's perspective, you're a test subject living in a cage. You're trying hard to avoid that unsatisfactory mark being placed on your permanent record - followed by death.
Tension is also why killing hundreds of NPC humanoids is a step down. When you graduate to mass murder, then you lose the sense of tension. One person wasn't enough of a threat, but thousands are? This is also why games with the 'strawberry jam' cover-based health regeneration are not improvements in the shooter genre. Cover-based healing removes just about all the threat of death - and therefore removes most of the potential for tension.
Maybe that's why I like Stalker so much?
Old School: Pitfall, Pong, ... does Circus Atari count? That's more like a workman's comp-eligible accident when you splat.
I still think that Bioshock would have made an awesome adventure game, with no need for violence - but it is what it is.
Frictional Games' games (Penumbra, Amnesia) don't require that you kill anyone - or at least its not a core part of gameplay.
Why is violence prevalent in games? Tension.
As an official NaNoWriMo winner. I can tell you that the best way to create a good story is to have tension. The most thrilling kind of tension is the threat of death. Now, you can create that tension with an industrial machine that can crush your skull - but you won't get much satisfaction from breaking a machine.
Portal was an awesome game - which did have a little violence. However, the automated sentries did NOT create nearly as much tension as confinement in the test laboratories did. Remember how cool those little hideaways were when you first found them. They were cool because somebody got out! From the player's perspective, you're a test subject living in a cage. You're trying hard to avoid that unsatisfactory mark being placed on your permanent record - followed by death.
Tension is also why killing hundreds of NPC humanoids is a step down. When you graduate to mass murder, then you lose the sense of tension. One person wasn't enough of a threat, but thousands are? This is also why games with the 'strawberry jam' cover-based health regeneration are not improvements in the shooter genre. Cover-based healing removes just about all the threat of death - and therefore removes most of the potential for tension.
Maybe that's why I like Stalker so much?
I think that the Myst games are considered as the least violent games. You can't die, there are no enemies, etc. Not really sure, but I remember reading it somewhere.Risingblade said:
They can certainly be fun. It's just providing a challenge, and the easiest challenge to create is you stopping something else. Be it Mario jumping on a Goomba, or Gordon Half-Life (yes I know, I call him Gordon Half-Life) shooting an h_grunt in the head with a .357, Masterchief shooting an Elite with a plasma pistol, whatever. The challenge in games comes from solving conflict or dealing with a difficult environment, and the easiest way to do that is that X will kill you if you don't kill X.
However there are certainly games that don't require violence to be enjoyable, and are fun from a puzzle solving or purely skill based system. Myst was mentioned, and that qualifies. It's fun because your opponent is the environment, figuring out how to progress. It's been awhile, but I really enjoyed the 1080 snowboarding games, and the early Tony Hawk series. They were challenging but it was because you needed skill and timing to master them. I've never played the Tricky series, and maybe I should, but in 1080 just doing a well timed run down a slope was fun, and outrunning the avalanche in 1080 Avalanche, landing every jump perfectly to maintain speed was fun.
As a personal opinion I'd put The 7th Guest in with this. It does have violence, but the player never harms anyone, except *20 year old spoiler* killing Stauf by solving the last puzzle. The game advances by solving puzzles and using mental dexterity, but still provides an interesting and enjoyable experience.
However there are certainly games that don't require violence to be enjoyable, and are fun from a puzzle solving or purely skill based system. Myst was mentioned, and that qualifies. It's fun because your opponent is the environment, figuring out how to progress. It's been awhile, but I really enjoyed the 1080 snowboarding games, and the early Tony Hawk series. They were challenging but it was because you needed skill and timing to master them. I've never played the Tricky series, and maybe I should, but in 1080 just doing a well timed run down a slope was fun, and outrunning the avalanche in 1080 Avalanche, landing every jump perfectly to maintain speed was fun.
As a personal opinion I'd put The 7th Guest in with this. It does have violence, but the player never harms anyone, except *20 year old spoiler* killing Stauf by solving the last puzzle. The game advances by solving puzzles and using mental dexterity, but still provides an interesting and enjoyable experience.
Well in the Abe Oddworld games there isn't much violence apart from blowing up sligs and gluckons when you can. Oh and you exploding and choking on gas. And the mudockens getting electrocuted for their tears and damn it that game is bad when you think about it. Anyway, violence isn't the point of the game, it's saving your friends. Nothing gets your heart pumping quiet like running for your life when you've got a herd of sligs or paramites up your ass and there's a bomb ticking.
There are a couple of cool non-violent games...but until a developer makes a game as immersive as Skyrim, or as richly detailed as Red Dead: Redemption without any violence, the argument is pointless.
Or running anywhere a Scrab isn't. I used to have nightmares about those bastards.Astoria said:
I was going to mention Myst but... well...
<spoiler=Riven, Exile, Revelations, and Uru canon spoilers>We have Riven, where the bad endings can end with such things as you and the other good guy shot and killed, while everyone else dies by being sucked into a vortex of doom (except the bad guy, who escapes). Then we have Exile, where the bad ending has you and a couple-with-baby beaten to death by a psycho with a hammer, not to mention that an entire civilization likely burns to death.Then we have Revelations, with forced kidnapping, soul-swapping and a ridiculously creepy scene where you can get killed by a girl with a crossbow. Then most deliciously of all, we have the Uru canon, in which an explorer is heard screaming for help shortly before her flambe'd remains are found.
What a non-violent game series!
So of course, I can point to my general playstyles in Mirror's Edge, Deus Ex, Spinter Cell et al. I generally dislike violent games, I prefer to use disabling techniques and evasion to overcome obstacles. (Besides, how is Faith supposed to prove that she didn't murder Pope if she's pwning cops left and right, despite being able to leg it three times faster than any of them?)
<spoiler=Riven, Exile, Revelations, and Uru canon spoilers>We have Riven, where the bad endings can end with such things as you and the other good guy shot and killed, while everyone else dies by being sucked into a vortex of doom (except the bad guy, who escapes). Then we have Exile, where the bad ending has you and a couple-with-baby beaten to death by a psycho with a hammer, not to mention that an entire civilization likely burns to death.Then we have Revelations, with forced kidnapping, soul-swapping and a ridiculously creepy scene where you can get killed by a girl with a crossbow. Then most deliciously of all, we have the Uru canon, in which an explorer is heard screaming for help shortly before her flambe'd remains are found.
What a non-violent game series!
So of course, I can point to my general playstyles in Mirror's Edge, Deus Ex, Spinter Cell et al. I generally dislike violent games, I prefer to use disabling techniques and evasion to overcome obstacles. (Besides, how is Faith supposed to prove that she didn't murder Pope if she's pwning cops left and right, despite being able to leg it three times faster than any of them?)
See my above post. The sequels have some alarmingly nasty ways of kicking the bucket.Blue Musician said:
You can't die in the first one, granted.
You CAN be sucked into a inter-dimensional nothingness for eternity, helplessly watching as a squealing psychopath resumes wreaking havoc on everything, presumably killing other people, and it's implied that THOUSANDS of people were killed horrifically pre-game. Also, you can find a rotting head in a chest.
Those are some of the more violent games out there. Not only will you die over and over, but these (along with Street Fighter IV) were the games that have actually made me punch my computer and/or smack my keyboard. Not even Gears of War filled me with such violent rage as VVVVVV.Treblaine said:
I think you guys are confusing "violent" with "gory". Violence just means that you are physically attacking someone, which both Mario and Sonic do all the time. Gory is the bloody gruesome stuff from God of War, Ninja Gaiden, etc. etc.
That being said, if you want great, nonviolent gameplay, check out Professor Layton and the Ace Attorney series (though Ace Attorney is about a bunch of murders, so whether or not it's violent is still up for debate in my head).
That being said, if you want great, nonviolent gameplay, check out Professor Layton and the Ace Attorney series (though Ace Attorney is about a bunch of murders, so whether or not it's violent is still up for debate in my head).
Well hang on a tick, what is violence:lacktheknack said:Those are some of the more violent games out there. Not only will you die over and over, but these (along with Street Fighter IV) were the games that have actually made me punch my computer and/or smack my keyboard. Not even Gears of War filled me with such violent rage as VVVVVV.Treblaine said:
Behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
I didn't intend to kill/hurt/damage my character in any of those games, the intention was to make it through unharmed and without harming anyone. It's the same principal as crashing my car in Dirt 3, i could break by neck but there was no aggression. The difficulty may make you WANT to be violent to someone or something, but that's not really actual violence.
Violence =/= gore or harm of any sort
Trauma Center (the abstract surgeon sim) is all about cutting people open and sewing them back up, but the intention is not to harm but to heal.
There was no "act of violence".
I can think of some more games;
-LittleBigPLanet
-Flower
-Motorstorm series (though you do have a "swipe" move you mostly cannot harm other racers)
-Trackmania Nations Forever (Most racing games actually)
Some people just cannot handle acts of violence, even abstract, sanitised and stylised simulated violence of a video game, yet they will accept that if they make a wrong move they fall into a woodchipper. But it's just a game, they are resurrected within seconds.
The significant is "harm intended to others" some people have fundamental moral objections to even simulated acts of this of even the most tame variety.
...I wasn't being serious. Hence the "Treblaine said:Well hang on a tick, what is violence:lacktheknack said:Those are some of the more violent games out there. Not only will you die over and over, but these (along with Street Fighter IV) were the games that have actually made me punch my computer and/or smack my keyboard. Not even Gears of War filled me with such violent rage as VVVVVV.Treblaine said:
Behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
I didn't intend to kill/hurt/damage my character in any of those games, the intention was to make it through unharmed and without harming anyone. It's the same principal as crashing my car in Dirt 3, i could break by neck but there was no aggression. The difficulty may make you WANT to be violent to someone or something, but that's not really actual violence.
Violence =/= gore or harm of any sort
Trauma Center (the abstract surgeon sim) is all about cutting people open and sewing them back up, but the intention is not to harm but to heal.
There was no "act of violence".
I can think of some more games;
-LittleBigPLanet
-Flower
-Motorstorm series (though you do have a "swipe" move you mostly cannot harm other racers)
-Trackmania Nations Forever (Most racing games actually)
Some people just cannot handle acts of violence, even abstract, sanitised and stylised simulated violence of a video game, yet they will accept that if they make a wrong move they fall into a woodchipper. But it's just a game, they are resurrected within seconds.
The significant is "harm intended to others" some people have fundamental moral objections to even simulated acts of this of even the most tame variety.
".