Serious vs. Non-serious games (aka: Violent vs. Non-violent games)

[Torrasque]

I recently bought Kirby's Epic Yarn, and after playing it for 30 minutes I realized it was extremely childish.
Hell, the entire game seems like a children's story book! Narrator and all!
But I didn't care because it was really fun, the animation is extremely fresh and beautiful, and I love Kirby.

When my friend came downstairs to see how the game was, I told him my realization, and he said "Yeah? So what? Its still good."
We got talking about the games we own: Halo, Gears of War, Mech Assault, Left 4 Dead, Metroid, etc.
Together, we own alot of games, and most of them are really 'mature', violent, gruesome, and definitely not intended for kids.
We also own Pokemon games, Mario games, Legend of Zelda games, and a hoard of Sonic games, all much more non-violent and 'childish' type games.

Take for example, Mortal Kombat vs. Super Smash Bros.
Mortal Kombat is one of the pioneers of the fighting game genre, and is really quite violent and gruesome.
Super Smash Bros. on the other hand is a pioneer of the "what if this person from this game fought that person from that game?" genre, and is still violent, but lacks the gore and adult themes from Mortal Kombat.
I enjoy playing both games for different reasons, but shouldn't it be odd that I enjoy lots of gore on one game, and none on the other?

So I ask you;

Do you think your enjoyment of a game is determined by whether it is violent/non-violent?
Do you like violent games more than non-violent games?
Do you think a non-violent game would be better if it was more violent?

P.S. I enjoy blowing people apart in Fallout as much as I enjoy running around in Kirby's Epic Yarn, so please don't think I am biased in either direction.

EDIT: I changed alot of "serious'" to "violent" due to confusion.
No, I don't hate violent games, and I am not trying to say they are bad.

 

[Spinozaad]

So over-the-top, ridiculous, childish, immature violence is 'serious', if I understood it correctly?

In that case, I don't give a damn either way. Because I can, out of principle, not acknowledge any Modern Warfare/Halo/Gears of War game as 'serious' or 'mature'.

Gruesome violence makes not for a mature game, in my honest eyes.

As for the more "obviously" childish games... They can be pretty entertaining, I guess. I did love me some Lego Star Wars back in the day.

A 'serious' game is not better, just because of its seriousness. If anything, it easily detracts from the experience because, well... I don't like my intelligence insulted by being assumed to be a 13-year old brat, who would enjoy 'serious' content. 'Serious content' like Modern Warfare.

 

[thenamelessloser]

I don't understand what you mean by the word serious. Mortal Kombat isn't serious at all. Having violence and blood doesn't make a game serious at all. I think there is a better term than serious for what you're saying.

 

[Krion_Vark]

I think that this thread is full of a bunch of What ifs. Like what if instead of having blood and guts spill out rainbows and unicorns flew around and what if we say mario get his head blown off by a rocket launcher. It all depends on your mood I like the "serious" games you mentioned but truthfully even the most "childish" game you can think of can also be one of the most serious games you have ever played. Take Left 4 Dead 2 for instance the main part of the game is completely serious while some mods put out making all special infected players Jockeys and then having Jockey races through the map makes it COMPLETELY childish and makes it no more serious than a pack of baby koalas trying to climb a tree.

 

[Chewster]

I think it depends on what you want from a game, really. I can enjoy serious and non-serious games (though if a game is childish to the point of being easy, that is no good, like the Lego games or whatever). I don't think there is anything odd in that. A well-constructed game is a well-constructed game no matter the genre, and just as I enjoy a wide range of film genres, I too enjoy many different types of games. People have complicated tastes.

I do get annoyed when games are marketed as being awesome and hardcore, but then turn out to be weak as fuck. Take Yoshi's Story, for the N64. The commercials said idiotic stuff like how the game was "dripping with attitude" and because I was a younger lad, I bought that line. Turns out, the game was actually designed for five-year-olds. Whoops.

 

[SomeLameStuff]

Violence =/= serious.

Would you take Madworld as serious? Dead Rising as serious? Fallout as serious?

So, no to all three questions.

 

[Plinglebob]

I think what the OP means is that a lot of games try and take themselves seriously (Gears of War, CoD, etc) and do you prefer these games or ones that are obviously lighter in tone.

Personally, I prefer a lighter tone and I think people who dismiss games like Kirby or Mario because "They look childish" are idiots.

 

[Torrasque]

Fine, violent, bloody, gruesome-ish games.

Games like Fallout that give you the ability to dismember your enemies, or games like Manhunt where you can more or less do whatever you want with your enemies. That kind of violent/serious nature.

I just wanted to avoid saying "violent games" because then someone would say "violent games are not bad!" or something like that which is not my point at all >.>

My point, is that there is a difference between blowing your opponents head off, and just throwing them off the stage so they disappear.

I want to know about what you all think that difference means.

(hope that makes things more clear =X)

 

[Ekonk]

Mortal Kombat isn't a 'serious' game.

Serious games are not about for what audience they are, but what they are a about. Manhunt? Super-mature, but is it serious? No. What is serious is that one little game that makes you shoot terrorists, but you will inevitably kill civilians by accident, which will spawn more terrorists. You'll never win. It is not about the game, but the message of the game.

That is a serious game.

 

[Torrasque]

I think it depends on what you want from a game, really.
A well-constructed game is a well-constructed game no matter the genre, and just as I enjoy a wide range of film genres, I too enjoy many different types of games. People have complicated tastes.

Exactly!
I have fun with a game because it is fun, not because I'd rather rip out Bowser's intestines than throw him off into oblivion.

I think alot of you were confused by me saying "serious".
I don't mean business-suit, straight faced, seriousness, I guess I really did mean violent?
I'll edit the main original post. (with a long bit about how this isn't how I think violent games are bad? which I know SOMEONE will say)

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Do you think your enjoyment of a game is determined by whether it is serious/non-serious?

Nope. I enjoy mature war games equally as much as I enjoy Mario.

Do you like serious games more than non-serious games?

Um... Same answer as above.

Do you think a non-serious game would be better if it was more serious?

Dude, they are both trying to accomplish the same thing: entertain the consumer. These are just two different methods. So no, I don't think a non-serious game would be better if it was more serious. Pokemon wouldn't appeal to me nearly as much if gun toting terrorists jumped in and took Misty while shooting and killing everyone in Cerulean city. Or if we jumped into the personal relationship problems between the red haired rival and his father, completing the backstory with many, many walls of text.

 

[Torrasque]

There, fixed.
Let the "Violent games are not bad, kiddie games are lame and stupid, this thread is stupid" misunderstanding begin?

*sigh*

I really hope people don't make this question more complex than it has to be, lol

 

[zama174]

Well i totally understood what you mean. (And FYI.. Right now all of you sound like the Zero Punctuation guy in my head right now.. )

But I would classify games like that as more relaxing. I am far more relaxed when I am playing a good old 64/Super Nintendo/ Nintendo game like mario cart or mario brothers, or Kirby. (Love that pink little cannibal..) Then say gears of war where I am frustrated beyond belief because of lag, and the substantial amount of bullshit involved in it.

Point being, games like Kirby and Mario are awesome and kick ass. It detracts from the seriousness of it and really can just let you relax while playing it where other, more "realist/serious" games have a tendency to make you tense and angry. (Not to say that screwed up game mechanics in Mario Brothers can't piss you off.. It can.. But its far easier to cope with.)

 

[Arkzism]

well violence doesn't mean it's serious and serious doesn't mean it has to be violent.. sometime violent games get boring, and sometime a game needs a little gore

 

[Veldaroth]

Honestly, I go from raising cows in Harvest Moon to blowing off limbs in Fallout, so I really don't think violence has anything to do with making a game "fun" since I enjoy both equally. However, I don't usually like games with "cute" or "childish" graphics. I would much rather that they lean towards realistic, but Harvest Moon is just so dang fun, I don't care.

 

[Torrasque]

So tempted to just drop "serious" from this whole topic?
The more posts I see, the more I realize its not what I meant at all >.<

 

[Nouw]

Both are fun. I love me a good round of Battlefield and just as much for the Lego games.

Both are violent but one is shown in a kid-friendly humorous way, one in a rather light-hearted war.

 

[Cazza]

What I enjoy in a game is story and gameplay. It doesn't matter to me if it's violent or non-violent. I do believe non-violent games (or just less focused on fighting or gameplay) can make better stories.

We don't see enough non-violent mature games.