Poll: Does Hatred actually look like a good game?

[BathorysGraveland2]

snip

I've already put my opinion down earlier on in the thread as to what interests me about this game. I dig the concept and some of the mechanics look interesting, and the soundtrack seems solid as well (judging from Adam Skorupa's past work). Furthermore, the idea of playing as an irredeemable, evil character that isn't in a satirical or light-hearted setting appeals to me. Diversity in gaming, and all that.

That said, I also like Spyro the Dragon - the complete opposite. Hardly some juvenile, 14-year old who's just trying to be edgy, which is why I take offence at those comments directed towards me and others interested in the game.

 

[Just Ebola]

snip

I've already put my opinion down earlier on in the thread as to what interests me about this game. I dig the concept and some of the mechanics look interesting, and the soundtrack seems solid as well (judging from Adam Skorupa's past work). Furthermore, the idea of playing as an irredeemable, evil character that isn't in a satirical or light-hearted setting appeals to me. Diversity in gaming, and all that.

That said, I also like Spyro the Dragon - the complete opposite. Hardly some juvenile, 14-year old who's just trying to be edgy, which is why I take offence at those comments directed towards me and others interested in the game.

You like light-hearted titles and you think this might be an interesting game. That's fine and good, and I'm glad you enjoy diversity in gaming. But the thing I'm a bit iffy about is that you think certain Escapists deserve to be moderated for having an opinion that differs from yours. You still haven't provided evidence of a forum user breaking the rules, unless you want to be hyper literal and ignore context altogether.

The fact of the matter is that opinions are sometimes inflammatory, especially with titles like this, whose entire purpose seems to be gaining publicity through shock value. You've yet to give a good reason why these people should be moderated, and so far they haven't.

Case closed, no?

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

snip

Well I'm sorry, but I think there is a rule being broken when I'm being called a moron and "socially maladjusted". Having opinions on the game is fine, but to use such terms to describe anyone who might be interested in playing it, especially when there are such people on this very site, is crossing a line, I feel. Maybe you have to call someone out specifically by name for it to register as mod-worthy, I'm not too entirely sure, but it is condescending as fuck all the same.

 

[Mutant1988]

snip

Here's a few.

It's an artistically decrepit taint, meant to cynically appeal to wannabe-misanthropic 14 year old's

I'm not socially maladjusted enough for the spree shooter fantasy to be appealing, I'm not 14 enough for the "GRRR SO EDGY" story to be anything less than contemptible

It looks like a game made by controversy invoking dipshits for controversy invoking dipshits. It's "edgy" masturbation material for juvenile morons.

Those types of remarks are the ones I'm discussing, especially the latter which holds no punches with the "for juvenile morons".

Juvenile in the sense that it reads like a socially maladjusted teenagers spree killing justifications manifesto and morons because most of the support for it seems to be for it's merits as explicitly "provocative", rather than how it handles it themes or for that matter, it's gameplay.

Most of the people that have expressed an interest in it have even said that it's dumb and juvenile, but could be fun to play.

I just happen to have a much harsher view on it.

South Park is obscene and offensive. But that's satire. Postal 2 is extremely violent, but that's also satire. Grand Theft Auto, is also violent and allows you to spree kill, but it's not the sole purpose of it and it's also, you guessed it - Satire.

This? It looks like the entire objective is anti-social wish fulfilment. There's a reason why the sole objective of most games isn't "kill all the innocents", you know, and there's plenty of reasons why someone wouldn't like a game designed that way. Is the fact that it can even exist supposed to make some sort of statement? That sounds extremely shallow to me, especially for a game that looks this bad.

Especially considering how many games do ultra violence better in terms of context and, seemingly, execution (Pun intended). And shallow is, to me, to the detriment of all mediums.

Does me expressing my harsh opinion make it valid to censor what I say? "Grr, grr, sic the mods on him."

Nope. Not any more valid than censoring Hatred, as detestably shallow and stupid as it is. I will keep calling it and the people that support it "stupid", because I think they and the game are incredibly shallow, appealing or being appealed by the novelty of it being "edgy" and seemingly nothing else.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

snip

So you're just going to out and out call me stupid and socially maladjusted? Well then I'm afraid we can't even really have a conversation then. At least certainly not one that is civil or rational. Oh well.

 

[Just Ebola]

snip

Well I'm sorry, but I think there is a rule being broken when I'm being called a moron and "socially maladjusted". Having opinions on the game is fine, but to use such terms to describe anyone who might be interested in playing it, especially when there are such people on this very site, is crossing a line, I feel. Maybe you have to call someone out specifically by name for it to register as mod-worthy, I'm not too entirely sure, but it is condescending as fuck all the same.

This brings up an interesting idea. Some people see this trailer and label it, and those who support it as "juvenile". And after the fact, you identify yourself as one of those people who support it. You believe these people should be punished, or at least believe that they're tempting mod wrath.

Don't you see how this can apply to anything? Do you want a system where anyone using this forum should censor themselves so that they don't potentially offend someone? Again, please show me a comment somebody has made in this thread that is more offensive than the game itself.

I'm sorry, the game looks childish and misguided, and that's the demographic it's trying to appeal to. You seem to think that people who want to express their opinions on an opinion seeking forum are over-stepping the bounds while the game itself states that humans are worms who deserve to die. Are you surprised people aren't being punished?

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

snip

Well as far as I'm concerned, the game isn't offensive at all because it's completely fictitious. It's certainly no more offensive than your avatar and username. Both are fictional media based upon/influenced by real events. Hatred is influenced by mass murderers and urban shooters while Ebola-Chan is a meme-character based on Ebola, which has caused countless deaths of real living humans. I wouldn't consider one to be more offensive than the other.

What I would consider more offensive than either is if someone labelled another as childish or "edgy" just because they're interested in it. Hell, many would consider yourself those very same terms, including perhaps immoral, for your interest in Ebola-Chan. If we had a conversation about Ebola-Chan, and exchanged opinions there would be no fuss. If I started calling everyone who was interested in Ebola-Chan an idiot, or a moron, or socially maladjusted I'd imagine you'd take some offence at that, and rightly so.

 

[Mutant1988]

snip

So you're just going to out and out call me stupid and socially maladjusted? Well then I'm afraid we can't even really have a conversation then. At least certainly not one that is civil or rational. Oh well.

I will if that's the extent you are willing to meet my arguments in support of the opinion I express.

If you stop reading the moment you see an objectionable word you can't really participate in any discussion, you know.

Feel free to tell me what merits you think Hatred has beyond it's ability to exist in the first place.

Note, a reason for why it has any merit as a creative work is not a requirement for it to exist in the first place. But it's a good start if you want the work not to be dismissed as shallow garbage.

 

[Just Ebola]

snip

Well as far as I'm concerned, the game isn't offensive at all because it's completely fictitious. It's certainly no more offensive than your avatar and username. Both are fictional media based upon/influenced by real events. Hatred is influenced by mass murderers and urban shooters while Ebola-Chan is a meme-character based on Ebola, which has caused countless deaths of real living humans. I wouldn't consider one to be more offensive than the other.

What I would consider more offensive than either is if someone labelled another as childish or "edgy" just because they're interested in it. Hell, many would consider yourself those very same terms, including perhaps immoral, for your interest in Ebola-Chan. If we had a conversation about Ebola-Chan, and exchanged opinions there would be no fuss. If I started calling everyone who was interested in Ebola-Chan an idiot, or a moron, or socially maladjusted I'd imagine you'd take some offence at that, and rightly so.

I've found that when someone knows they've lost an argument, they try to make it personal. If you have to drag my person into this debate, than I feel nothing but sympathy for you. My username has nothing to do with any meme (I didn't even know there was one) 'Ebola' because that was a big deal in the news when I thought of it and 'chan' because my interest in anime and Japanese culture. My avatar is a character from an anime I really like. Please tell me how that's offensive.

Seems to me your entire argument is a lot of accusing and very little backing up your words. If you find a pre-rendered cinematic where a woman is grabbed by her hair and shot in the mouth less offensive than somebody on the internet calling it "edgy" than I seriously worry for you moral compass.

Again, I don't know who this Ebola_chan is besides myself. If you find it so objectionable we can exchange names and continue the debate that way.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

snip

Well fair enough then, I guess. That's a pretty big coincidence, so I'm sure you can see where I was coming from by it. Avatars and usernames are hardly personal, by the way.

Anyways, I don't find Hatred offensive because it's a video game, with pixelated characters. I can be invested in a game and its setting, but it'll never offend me. The fact that it's a woman being shot and not a man doesn't concern me either (and that's coming from a feminist). I've slaughtered plenty of innocents of either gender in games before, including the first two Grand Theft Auto's which seem to have a similar vibe to this. So that really doesn't bother me in the slightest.

I guess I could see how someone who's been affected by a mass shooting would be offended by it however, due to traumatic flashbacks it might give. I certainly sympathise with such people, but I won't let their experiences ruin my own interest in this game.

And you blew the whole mod thing way out of proportion. What I originally said was " I imagine some of the posts in this thread would be borderline mod-wrath-esque.". I certainly wasn't campaigning for any mod wrath, nor did I even report their posts. I just brought up how borderline I considered those posts to be.

I can't help but feel this whole debate has just been a waste of both of our time seeing as how trivial the subject of it really is.

snip

If we were on YouTube or a number of other such sites I wouldn't have a problem with the harsh language, and I would certainly dish it back in kind. But the Escapist generally strives for more civil, respectful discourse, which I try to honour. Which is why it's a bit more difficult to chat with someone who quite clearly thinks I'm a shitty person.

As for Hatred merits, I've already made a couple of posts on why I'm interested in the game. One on the first page and another in reply to Ebola-Chan. Posts numbers 6 and 82 specifically.

 

[Just Ebola]

Anyways, I don't find Hatred offensive because it's a video game, with pixelated characters. I can be invested in a game and its setting, but it'll never offend me. The fact that it's a woman being shot and not a man doesn't concern me either (and that's coming from a feminist). I've slaughtered plenty of innocents of either gender in games before, including the first two Grand Theft Auto's which seem to have a similar vibe to this. So that really doesn't bother me in the slightest.

I guess I could see how someone who's been affected by a mass shooting would be offended by it however, due to traumatic flashbacks it might give. I certainly sympathise with such people, but I won't let their experiences ruin my own interest in this game.

And you blew the whole mod thing way out of proportion. What I originally said was " I imagine some of the posts in this thread would be borderline mod-wrath-esque.". I certainly wasn't campaigning for any mod wrath, nor did I even report their posts. I just brought up how borderline I considered those posts to be.

I can't help but feel this whole debate has just been a waste of both of our time seeing as how trivial the subject of it really is.

It's only trivial if we trivialize it, which is something I don't do. I wasn't trying to make some kind of feminist statement when I brought up the woman being shot in the mouth, truth is it would be just as despicable regardless of whether it was a man or a woman. The slaughter of innocents being the entire point of the game is what makes it distasteful, though if I'm being honest I don't think it will matter. I think it's a drop in the ocean, what with the way things are developed in this day and age. I think it's a pointless attention grab at best and a disgusting wish fulfillment game made by immature developers at worst. It's the latter, by the way. Either way, the world doesn't need this garbage.

Don't agree with that? That's fine. Think other people should be punished or shut up because they see it for what it is? For me that's where a problem arises. You say I've blown things out of proportion, but the right to say what somebody is thinking is the very essence of a debate, something you haven't taken part in throughout this entire debacle.

I was hoping you would actually respond to some of the points I made rather than just gloss over them and cherrypick which points you would (I'm being very generous with this term) argue, but I guess that's not the case.

 

[Phasmal]

No, pretty much the only thing Hatred has going for it is it's `Look at us so edgy! They'll try and censor us cause we're 2xtreme!` and I'm kinda... not interested.

It just seems kind of childish to me.

Besides, the murder-spree fun of things like GTA and Saints Row is because it's usually silly and not what you're supposed to be doing at the time, that's what made going off on a rampage fun. It wasn't because I wanted to see people crying and suffering. Where's the fun in that?

So, no, I won't be picking up Hatred.
And a good thing too, cause it's so edgy I'd cut myself on it.

Hahahhha... I'll see myself out.

 

[ClanCrusher]

You know what my big question about this game is? What happens in the game if you don't go around killing people? What if you don't gun down any civilians and just run to the end of the level or wander around the place without ever firing your weapon? Do the police still show up and gun you down? 'Cause that would be hilarious bit of social commentary right there.

As for the original topic...no. I would not buy this game. Not unless I got recommendations from Yahtzee, Extra Creditz, Jimquisition, and Ben Kuchera. And even then it would only be after it went on a 75% off Steam sale.

 

[chadachada123]

Eh, the destruction looks really nice to me, and the modding potential puts this moderately high up on my list. Plus, and this may or may not be petty, the thought of buying the first AO game allowed on Steam is pretty cool.

It's only trivial if we trivialize it, which is something I don't do. I wasn't trying to make some kind of feminist statement when I brought up the woman being shot in the mouth, truth is it would be just as despicable regardless of whether it was a man or a woman. The slaughter of innocents being the entire point of the game is what makes it distasteful, though if I'm being honest I don't think it will matter. I think it's a drop in the ocean, what with the way things are developed in this day and age. I think it's a pointless attention grab at best and a disgusting wish fulfillment game made by immature developers at worst. It's the latter, by the way. Either way, the world doesn't need this garbage.

Don't agree with that? That's fine. Think other people should be punished or shut up because they see it for what it is? For me that's where a problem arises. You say I've blown things out of proportion, but the right to say what somebody is thinking is the very essence of a debate, something you haven't taken part in throughout this entire debacle.

I was hoping you would actually respond to some of the points I made rather than just gloss over them and cherrypick which points you would (I'm being very generous with this term) argue, but I guess that's not the case.

There is a small bit of irony, you know, arguing that this game is immature and whatnot, while your username is that of the moe personification of a deadly disease.

 

[chadachada123]

You know what my big question about this game is? What happens in the game if you don't go around killing people? What if you don't gun down any civilians and just run to the end of the level or wander around the place without ever firing your weapon? Do the police still show up and gun you down? 'Cause that would be hilarious bit of social commentary right there.

The dev said that you would be given a reason to start shooting if you tried to avoid it. He was really cryptic in the way he said it, so maybe the protag will literally start seeing shit or something. Or maybe it'll, like you suggested, be like GTA V where you can get a wanted star literally from standing within eyesight of someone if they decide to call the cops on you for no reason.

 

[Callate]

I don't know; is the content really that much worse than, say, Carmageddon?

Like that game, it might be worth playing for a few minutes at a time to blow off steam. Is anyone going to be playing it a year or more after it comes out? Probably not, barring modability- and the kind of mods that might be spurred by a game like Hatred would probably make some of the creepier mods in Skyrim seem like a Disney cartoon.

My major curiosity is not how lurid or grotesque the violence is going to be, but whether, given that violence, the designers will actually be bothered to make a game with tight controls and compelling mechanics, rather than just phoning it in and presuming gore alone will be enough to succeed.

In that regard, I sort of hope they pull it off. If not, their efforts will put them in company with titles like Evony and the lowest tiers of the free-to-play ghettos, and that's inelegant company indeed.

 

[Just Ebola]

Eh, the destruction looks really nice to me, and the modding potential puts this moderately high up on my list. Plus, and this may or may not be petty, the thought of buying the first AO game allowed on Steam is pretty cool.



There is a small bit of irony, you know, arguing that this game is immature and whatnot, while your username is that of the moe personification of a deadly disease.

If you haven't kept up with the rest of this thread, my username has nothing to do with any established memes, or anything of the like. If you can't argue your points without bringing me into this personally then that doesn't bode well for your argument at all. Don't compare my maturity to that of this sad wish fulfillment game without at least reading the rest of the thread. More than willing to offer up my real name if anyone really wants to discuss it.

 

[Mutant1988]

If we were on YouTube or a number of other such sites I wouldn't have a problem with the harsh language, and I would certainly dish it back in kind. But the Escapist generally strives for more civil, respectful discourse, which I try to honour. Which is why it's a bit more difficult to chat with someone who quite clearly thinks I'm a shitty person.

Seeing how you haven't actually discussed the game but started a tangent about civility, well... You don't inspire me with confidence in your rhetorical abilities, if nothing else.

Feel free to explain why I should like Hatred and the people that like such vapid garbage. I'm waiting.

You say it has a good concept. What about it is good, specifically? The absolute gratuitous attention seeking of the marketing? The utterly misanthropic protagonist? The utterly tasteless subject matter? The shallowness and triviality it makes of severe mental issues for the sake of shits and giggles? The lazy monochromatic visuals?

It's explicit violence porn specifically made to garner controversy and nothing else. Pretending it's anything else is lying.

Do the police still show up and gun you down? 'Cause that would be hilarious bit of social commentary right there.

One problem with that - The main character isn't black.

 

[chadachada123]

Eh, the destruction looks really nice to me, and the modding potential puts this moderately high up on my list. Plus, and this may or may not be petty, the thought of buying the first AO game allowed on Steam is pretty cool.



There is a small bit of irony, you know, arguing that this game is immature and whatnot, while your username is that of the moe personification of a deadly disease.

If you haven't kept up with the rest of this thread, my username has nothing to do with any established memes, or anything of the like. If you can't argue your points without bringing me into this personally then that doesn't bode well for your argument at all. Don't compare my maturity to that of this sad wish fulfillment game without at least reading the rest of the thread. More than willing to offer up my real name if anyone really wants to discuss it.

Ah, I skipped over that post, though I had read most of the rest and didn't see anything on it. As he said, that's a mighty, mighty big coincidence.

I wasn't arguing anything aside from how hypocritical it looked. "Looked" being the operative word.

 

[Sarge034]

It looks like a solid game. From what little gameplay there is floating about it looks like it handles well, looks good, and runs smoothly. Apart from that, who can say? There isn't really enough gameplay out there to make a real judgment. Personally, I'm not opposed to the game on the basis of its' premise. It's a game, it has a right to exist. I'm just not that big a fan of isometric shooters.