Poll: Can a game ever make you say "This game should not exist"?
- Thread starter someguy1231
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Just because it exists doesn't mean you have to play it. Doesn't mean anyone has to play it. Doesn't mean you can't say mean things about people for playing it (please, don't). It just means that someone, at some point, created a game in a condition that can be played. (And in the case of Ride to Hell or the like, even that condition seems fairly tenuous.)
Won't somebody please think of the fictional children!!Fox12 said:
Do you have the same feelings towards murder in games? If not, why?
My opinion is once we start banning things as being too heinous to do in fiction we've crossed a much worse line. I mean seriously you want to arrest people because they made a drawing (or pixels in this case)?
There's a lesson to be learned from any art, whether its good or horrible.
Sometimes the lesson isn't always explicit enough for us to grasp right away, but its there.
Hatred - Shock value isn't enough to make a game interesting or fun, and doing a hamfisted job of taking the rampage aspect of Postal and GTA/Saints Row + moar grimdark does not equal best game evar. Neither does it mean the end of gaming. It just means that some people have no imagination and no creative depth so they take low hanging fruit. Liking the game doesn't mean you're a bad person, but there are a lot of folks who would probably say you've poor taste when it comes to "what's good". Its not even about the content, its about the lack of anything else beyond mindless murder machine. Does not make for compelling play. One trick pony, and its not even a good trick.
Aliens: Colonial Marines - Publishers will lie to you, don't judge games by their trailers. And its a lesson for devs and pubs alike to not promise one thing, then deliver something totally not even remotely like what you promised. Pissing on the customer base is akin to lighting whatever money you have on fire and hope that it goes out before you're bankrupt and fucked.
Those are 2 examples of bad games and potential lessons to be learned from them. And no one says you can't like them even if they're bad. Just don't expect universal support. But it still has a right to exist.
Slaughtering Grounds - Probably the best example of how to make a poor piece of shit semi-functional and call it a game. Shows me that while some devs/pubs do stupid things, at least they are way better functionally than this digital turd.
Sometimes the lesson isn't always explicit enough for us to grasp right away, but its there.
Hatred - Shock value isn't enough to make a game interesting or fun, and doing a hamfisted job of taking the rampage aspect of Postal and GTA/Saints Row + moar grimdark does not equal best game evar. Neither does it mean the end of gaming. It just means that some people have no imagination and no creative depth so they take low hanging fruit. Liking the game doesn't mean you're a bad person, but there are a lot of folks who would probably say you've poor taste when it comes to "what's good". Its not even about the content, its about the lack of anything else beyond mindless murder machine. Does not make for compelling play. One trick pony, and its not even a good trick.
Aliens: Colonial Marines - Publishers will lie to you, don't judge games by their trailers. And its a lesson for devs and pubs alike to not promise one thing, then deliver something totally not even remotely like what you promised. Pissing on the customer base is akin to lighting whatever money you have on fire and hope that it goes out before you're bankrupt and fucked.
Those are 2 examples of bad games and potential lessons to be learned from them. And no one says you can't like them even if they're bad. Just don't expect universal support. But it still has a right to exist.
Slaughtering Grounds - Probably the best example of how to make a poor piece of shit semi-functional and call it a game. Shows me that while some devs/pubs do stupid things, at least they are way better functionally than this digital turd.
Well, while I can conceive of games that may theoretically be so messed up they shouldn't exist...
But I'm not quite sure I'd actually want to ban any of them.
I mean, to dig up a classic (ancient) example...
Custer's last stand is... Dull, boring, and highly offensive on multiple levels...
But do I care that it exists? eh.
Now, can you push into the realms of even more dubious bad taste? (What, a game about a US military officer trying to rape a native american woman isn't questionable enough yet? )
Well, probably. But... the question is, why would anyone make such a thing?
Though... For some people, I think the answer often ends up being 'because I can'.
I don't even know...
Is there a line? Maybe.
What would it be though?
And would you trust anyone that tries to insist they know what that line is?
But I'm not quite sure I'd actually want to ban any of them.
I mean, to dig up a classic (ancient) example...
Custer's last stand is... Dull, boring, and highly offensive on multiple levels...
But do I care that it exists? eh.
Now, can you push into the realms of even more dubious bad taste? (What, a game about a US military officer trying to rape a native american woman isn't questionable enough yet? )
Well, probably. But... the question is, why would anyone make such a thing?
Though... For some people, I think the answer often ends up being 'because I can'.
I don't even know...
Is there a line? Maybe.
What would it be though?
And would you trust anyone that tries to insist they know what that line is?
The only time I ever think like that is those racist/ descrimation games like Ethnic cleansing.
Geez I didn't know a progammer can be a bigot, I guess he or she learn it all from a white person.
Oh there also those boring specific games like desert bus aswell. Did they just able to market it around how boring the game is?
Geez I didn't know a progammer can be a bigot, I guess he or she learn it all from a white person.
Oh there also those boring specific games like desert bus aswell. Did they just able to market it around how boring the game is?
Honestly, yes. There are lots of games I think should not exist. However, most of these games aren't on the consoles, nor are they on PC. They're on mobile devices.
The sheer number of games out there that have been made -purely- to extort people into spending huge amounts of money on inapp purchases should not exist. They are, simply put, ethically wrong. They exploit children, they exploit elderly, and the grim possibility is that they may end up becoming the norm rather than the exception.
Saying that you don't need to use the store in order to complete the game may be -technically- true. But when the game is made from the ground up to encourage you to spend money on their store, that's a bit iffy.
The sheer number of games out there that have been made -purely- to extort people into spending huge amounts of money on inapp purchases should not exist. They are, simply put, ethically wrong. They exploit children, they exploit elderly, and the grim possibility is that they may end up becoming the norm rather than the exception.
Saying that you don't need to use the store in order to complete the game may be -technically- true. But when the game is made from the ground up to encourage you to spend money on their store, that's a bit iffy.
There are some who think entire groups of people shouldn't exist, so I am sure there are plenty who have no qualms about passing such harsh judgement on a game.
In matters of taste? No, if games are to be called an "art-form" then the same creative freedom should be allowed. Whether or not you are called a deranged fuck-wad for making the game or the views it a espouses is the prerogative of the user.
In terms of "not-existing" in general, I'd prefer if a game came out and was then just boycotted (actually boycotted, not bought day 1 after claiming that you will boycott) and just flopped because it was a piece of shit. To me, any game which doesn't bring anything new to the table should be right out, any game that will just cash in and not even try (I'm looking at you, FIFA). This is and always has been dictated by the consumer, as it should be. I wish that the consumer base wasn't such a retard at times but that is out of my control.
In terms of "not-existing" in general, I'd prefer if a game came out and was then just boycotted (actually boycotted, not bought day 1 after claiming that you will boycott) and just flopped because it was a piece of shit. To me, any game which doesn't bring anything new to the table should be right out, any game that will just cash in and not even try (I'm looking at you, FIFA). This is and always has been dictated by the consumer, as it should be. I wish that the consumer base wasn't such a retard at times but that is out of my control.
Of course I can. Besides the obvious that encourage hate speech, or are designed around bullshit micro-transaction like so many on mobile, there are those who killed the dignity of great franchises that made me hate the new developer, and I even wish those bloody developers didn't exist. I wonder if we would've had more great games to choose from if EA never ate up all those developers.
I don't mind Hatred though.
I don't mind Hatred though.
From an artistic perspective, not really. There are things I don't like in games, film, books etc, but I'm can't justify denying them existence.
From a "this game is so bad, why are they even charging money for it" perspective, I'd have to say yes. But even then, I mean they should have to go and bring it to an acceptable standard before release.(Where acceptable means actual QA, bugtesting etc)
From a "this game is so bad, why are they even charging money for it" perspective, I'd have to say yes. But even then, I mean they should have to go and bring it to an acceptable standard before release.(Where acceptable means actual QA, bugtesting etc)
I agree with this. Those games shouldn't exist. There is absolutely no reason to design a game like this except out of pure greed, for purposeful exploitation of people with addictive/compulsive tendencies.Tuxedoman said:
A F2P pay to win game is explicitly designed to be a worse game if you don't pay to skip it's most tedious parts.
That should not be how a game is designed - Ever.
Aside from that, plenty of games have made me ask "Why was this released?", due to their atrocious qualities. Example? Rogue Warrior. Boring and utterly incompetent - Cardinal sins of a video game. But I suppose it was for the better that it was made, since it gives me something to make fun of.
I'm in two minds. On the one hand, I think artistic expression should not be censored. Adults can make decisions about what they want to consume, and it's their own fault if they end up offended. On the other hand, I would like to go back and prevent RapeLay ever being made.
itt: People who were either too young or too lucky to pay real money for Daikatana.
Certain games definitely should not exist.
Certain games definitely should not exist.
Normally, no and I hate people who try to moralise the masses. However that does not mean I am above having the opinion that a certain game should not exist. I mean, a game that has a gruesome scene with a realistic killing shouldn't be censored for grown adults but a game only about killing them and having graphic sex with the corpse? Try telling me that should exist.
Being honest between working in a prison and the millitery I'm hard to offend. So harm none do as you will. That real harm not offend harm.
Depends on what exactly you're asking. If we mean in terms of the themes it contains, certainly not. If we're talking, for example, about how tons of games somehow make it on Steam without being close to a finished product, then yeah. I can definitely see myself thinking that way.