Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TamerVirus]

So folks, what's the main guy's name?

[pisskop]

So folks, what's the main guy's name?

turns out its 'Sue'.  Who knew?

[TamerVirus]

I thought it was Knott M. Portent

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Hah, this is great. Not just the fact that they made Edgelord: The Movie: The Game: The Stick Shooter, but the way that everybody is responding to it. There's nothing impressively violent about this. Seriously. I mean, fuck, have we already forgotten about Saw and Hostel? Splatterhouse? Gears of War? This is nothing. This is blood spurts and vanishing body parts. It's literally Borderlands-tier stuff. Go watch a torture film and then tell me this is some new dangerous ground for violence.

I cannot believe the idea this is not satirical. Even if it is meant to be serious it is still satirical. That's how much this cannot possibly be taken seriously.

This doesn't look all that impressive as a game, as much as I love the protagonist being Nathan Explosion meets Wolfgang Darksythe it's just a stick shooter. But hey, maybe this isn't just a pisstake and they'll manage to hook me.

[pisskop]

Hah, this is great. Not just the fact that they made Edgelord: The Movie: The Game: The Stick Shooter, but the way that everybody is responding to it. There's nothing impressively violent about this. Seriously. I mean, fuck, have we already forgotten about Saw and Hostel? Splatterhouse? Gears of War? This is nothing. This is blood spurts and vanishing body parts. It's literally Borderlands-tier stuff. Go watch a torture film and then tell me this is some new dangerous ground for violence.

I cannot believe the idea this is not satirical. Even if it is meant to be serious it is still satirical. That's how much this cannot possibly be taken seriously.

This doesn't look all that impressive as a game, as much as I love the protagonist being Nathan Explosion meets Wolfgang Darksythe it's just a stick shooter. But hey, maybe this isn't just a pisstake and they'll manage to hook me.

Would you compare watching violence and torture to playing it?  The level of interactivity is (presumably) higher, and the audio in this case is more notable (to me) than the visual.

Also, after the first one (two with Saw) I stopped caring.  They became too focused on the torture and were unable to pull me into it.  Good sadism has to draw you into it.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Yeah, sure, swiveling my thumbstick around is so interactive. I mean, I could go on to cite a larger number of video games, but the main example (Postal) has already been brought up. But hey, since you want it: Mortal Kombat, Doom, Carmaggedon, Manhunt, GTA, Super Columbine Massacre RPG, Punisher, Hitman (Special mention for Hitman: Contracts, because holy shit), Rule of Rose, System Shock 2, Silent Hill, Fatal Frame, Mad Word, Resident Evil, Saw The Game, Dead Rising, Hotline Miami, Max Payne, and every permutation, sequel, or clone of the aforementioned.

[pisskop]

Yeah, sure, swiveling my thumbstick around is so interactive. I mean, I could go on to cite a larger number of video games, but the main example (Postal) has already been brought up. But hey, since you want it: Mortal Kombat, Doom, Carmaggedon, Manhunt, GTA, Super Columbine Massacre RPG, Punisher, Hitman (Special mention for Hitman: Contracts, because holy shit), Rule of Rose, System Shock 2, Silent Hill, Fatal Frame, Mad Word, Resident Evil, Saw The Game, Dead Rising, Hotline Miami, and every permutation, sequel, or clone of the aforementioned.

Right.  I guess media is media is media, yeah.
You cant compare watching a movie where a protagonist is brutally tortured to a game where you do it with a concious purpose.

Also, since you bring up so many games where you kill, Id like to mention that most of those games dont have you killing civilians, much less completely unarmed or innocent civilians who bear a resemblance to humans.

MGS2, you cant kill the American marines on the boat.
Most games with children: cant kill them (skyrim being the latest, I think)
Most games dont have the people begging for their lives when you can kill bystanders.
You can try to explain or heckle away the concerns; but I dont think it will work.

[TamerVirus]

With the advent of VR just around the corner, I wonder how intense these murder simulators will become

[Parsely]

MGS2, you cant kill the American marines on the boat.

They're only present briefly in cutscenes. By the time the game actually becomes interactive all the men on the deck and any crew not in the holds have been killed by the Gurlukovich soldiers, so there is no opportunity to harm them if you were so inclined.

Later in the game there are unarmed, restrained and completely defenseless hostages which you aren't supposed to disturb but are allowed to punch, shoot and kill, though it earns you an instant game over. Same goes for Emma Emmerich. You're allowed to shoot and kill seagulls at no penalty though your support team will call you on the codec and scold you for doing so repeatedly. There's a parrot in a cage which cannot be shot, it's kind of an easter egg but it's easy to find. Explosions don't harm him and bullets are redirected away so they don't strike him.

[Bohandas]

So folks, what's the main guy's name?

turns out its 'Sue'.  Who knew?

Maybe that's what he's so pissed off about.

EDIT:
Also, on an unrelated note, does anybody else think that he looks like a combination of Nathan Explosion (from Metalocalypse) and Samara (the evil ghost girl from The Ring)

[Neonivek]

So lets get this straight...

The controversy on his game is more popular then the game itself? HMMM I wonder if someone is pulling strings from the background.

Reminds me of Passion of the Christ where they did it intentionally.

[lijacote]

It is not simply killing people that is problematic in a game, it is the attitude that accompanies it. That is not to say that this game will be causally responsible for murders, but that it is a product of its time, and will serve to collectively (with other products of our culture) produce the culture of tomorrow and thereafter. It is emblematic: it shows us in that it is we who have produced it. The theme, though ridiculous, is serious in that it is exactly what murderers have used to (for lack of a better word) to justify themselves. People are scum and need to be cleansed:

"I, as a natural selector, will eliminate all who I see unfit, disgraces of human race and failures of natural selection."

The attitude is undoubtedly problematic, and everyone should be able to see that. Should the game not be made, then? I think the game has every reason to exist (screw rights, they are unrelated here) if it comments meaningfully or helpfully on the theme. Does simply simulating the murders and making entertainment or an aesthetic (no matter how base) experience out of them constitute a comment? Perhaps, but on what? That we are like this? I can see some value in that, but I also think that the possibly deleterious effects of such unadulterated violence would be avoided very easily through this comment being made in an Onion article. Satire, then, would be the path I'd advocate. This is not satire. It is analogue, a reproduction, and as such does not count as being critical or witty.

That is not to say that the game should be made "unserious": satire need not be laughs and giggles. If the game made an effort not to simply be a murderer's wet dream, if it had a plot to speak of, if the victims were more than screams and other desired responses, for example, then I think it could be something. Not that I've seen the full game, but it looks to be the way I describe it. Also, personally, I detest jokey games.

Perhaps more interesting (nah, not really though) than the game itself is the controversy, and the response by the apologists of the game to that controversy. One post in particular caught my eye: the pulling of logos from the game constituted as censorship, i.e. treading on some nebulous freedom. Whose freedom? This is very contradictory.

So lets get this straight...
The controversy on his game is more popular then the game itself? HMMM I wonder if someone is pulling strings from the background.

The amount of "Herp and Derp react to Hatred gameplay trailer" videos made me nauseous.

[miljan]

Mehh, people are stupid. Its juts a game that marketing  targets those stupid people that will react to it and spread the word about the game. Do you kill screaming innocence, kids, monsters, robots, its all same, just pixels on a monitor. If people dont understand that, nothing will  help them.

The thing I actually like about it is the game looks like alien shooter. Hope they actually do make something interesting from it.

[TamerVirus]

If we are to define art as something that causes an emotional responses, then this game is definitely art.

Anger disgust and contempt everywhere

[scrdest]

If we are to define art as something that causes an emotional responses, then this game is definitely art.

Anger disgust and contempt everywhere

Except we also have the concepts of 'good' and 'bad' art, which, for the most part, correspond to whether the art causes the intended emotional response of the author. And I doubt the anger, disgust and contempt were intended to be directed at the GAME.