Hatred Articles RSS Feed | GameSkinny.com Hatred RSS Feed on GameSkinny.com https://www.gameskinny.com/ en Launch Media Network Music Soothes the Savage Critic: How Good Game Music Hijacked My Brain https://www.gameskinny.com/l1ir1/music-soothes-the-savage-critic-how-good-game-music-hijacked-my-brain https://www.gameskinny.com/l1ir1/music-soothes-the-savage-critic-how-good-game-music-hijacked-my-brain Sat, 06 Jun 2015 17:30:01 -0400 Matt Amenda

I recently reviewed two rogue-likes, Card Dungeon and Voyage to Farland. They were both similar games when it comes to mechanics, theme, and artistic merit. But one had fantastic music, and the other didn't. I gave Voyage to Farland 2 stars. Card Dungeon got 8. 

That got me thinking: was Card Dungeon really that much better of a game, or was the music so awesome that I was more willing to overlook the flaws? I tried to be impartial and intelligent about the reviewing process, but I couldn't shake the feeling that the music might have brainwashed me. How many stars did Card Dungeon squeeze out of me just by having good tunes? How many of my favorite games only got there because they had awesome music and I didn't even notice?

Obviously we all know good music in games when we hear it, but I think that music influences our perceptions of the quality of a game more than we realize.

Windwaker

There's a term in advertising that applies to this phenomenon called an "executional cue".

Defined in this short piece from the Advances in Consumer Research journal, a cue is "an extremely flexible concept for describing aspects of a stimulus which may prove meaningful to a respondent". A cue can be anything: a shade of red, a cotton shirt, a guitar riff, anything that's calculated to make you want to buy something. Artists take advantage of this all the time to affect the emotions of the viewer. What colors will make people happy, or sad, or disgusted? When composing a photo, what will make the subject look lonely, or vulnerable, or triumphant?

But when evaluating the artistic beauty of a game, people talk about the sound of a game a lot less. Well, why not? Every instrument in a song, every note, every melody and harmony and chord progression, is a calculated choice from the composer to do one thing: change your mood. Music and sound design, in the end, might be even more instrumental (ha ha) in shaping our emotional experience in a game than what we experience with our eyes. Each instrument has its own traits that we associate with it, and each has its own emotional trigger.

Why was The Last of Us so sad and melancholy all the time, even when you were just walking around? Because there were a lot of tinny, grating violins in the background - when paired with a scene where you walk through the rotted remains of some dead family's house, associate them with woe, poverty, heartbreak, etc. But then that is pleasantly subverted in the famous Giraffe scene, when the strings come in cautiously but hopefully as you approach the giraffe, inspiring feelings of awe and child-like wonder, and finishing with a simple, repeating glockenspiel-keyboard melody, reminding us that even at the end of the world of man, beauty can still be found.

Can you imagine if some assclown put bongos and a tuba solo to that? It would ruin everything, wouldn't it? Remember...

No matter how touching or cool the scene/game is, nothing can surmount a terrible sound choice.

Or on the complete opposite end of the spectrum, we have the Hotline Miami 2 soundtrack. Holy hell. If I ever had to kill every last human being in the room and I got to pick what music to play to it, it would be this soundtrack. It's 50 tracks of glorious, pounding '80s techno so intense that every time I died I felt like I was disappointing the music for not killing hard enough. I became a bloodthirsty maniac.

Yes, the gameplay was awesome and the killing was satisfying, but that game would not have been nearly as good without a soundtrack to commit wholesale Soviet slaughter to. I didn't need a reason to slay two dozen mobsters with a brick: the music was enough to make me do it.

You hear that, HatredThat's one way you could have let me have fun killing a sea of brainless bystanders and cops. When I reviewed that pretentious turd I didn't even mention the music, because there wasn't any worth mentioning: just some droning doom noise in the back. It was enough to make me feel a little empty and bitter, but it also made me bored. It definitely contributed to feeling that the game was pointless. A little bit of screamo or something would have made me feel more awesome while I was murdering.

Brutal Legend

See, all it takes sometimes to nudge your feelings in the right direction is the well-timed use of the right kind of music.

Just think back on all your favorite moments in video games. When Link opens a treasure chest, how do you think it would affect you differently without the old "da da da DAAAAA" chime at the end? How about if instead of hearing Mario's death jingle when he fell in a hole, we were greeted with dead silence?

Even if you're the kind of gamer that cares more about the mechanics of a game than the art, the influence that music has on the experience is everywhere, all the time. That's why I always try to get the best possible sound out of my games, whether with some nice headphones or giant speakers, because sometimes a few notes are all that separates a dull game from a miraculous one.

]]>
Hatred And The End of Shock Value In Gaming https://www.gameskinny.com/1l2ou/hatred-and-the-end-of-shock-value-in-gaming https://www.gameskinny.com/1l2ou/hatred-and-the-end-of-shock-value-in-gaming Sun, 07 Jun 2015 08:30:01 -0400 Stan Rezaee

The release of the highly controversial Hatred, followed by the reaction of the gaming community, has demonstrated that the culture has matured. Games today no longer need shock value just for attention, because the community has established a set of standards.

Hatred is supposed to be a dark and gritty game that puts players in the role of "The Antagonist" as he embarks on a personal genocide. However, all the attention wasn't hype; it was a condemnation of its controversial content and its failure to offer anything worth calling it a game. The entire point of this title seems to be little more than just a developer fishing for attention by attempting to add fuel to a controversy that has been dead since the mid 2000's.

Back In The Day

Hatred could have been a unique and groundbreaking experience had it been released anytime from 1999 - 2004. Back in the day, video games were either part of a niche culture or seen as child's play. To appeal to a more adult audience, titles like Mortal Kombat, Doom and Grand Theft Auto III explored more mature content while Postal and Custer's Revenge pushed the boundaries of what was acceptable. At the same time, many developers took great joy in sticking it to anti-video game activists like Jack Thompson.

Yet as of 2015, video games have become part of pop-culture, while gaming culture has become more austere. Memorable video games are expected to either have a thought-provoking story with multi-layered characters, an incredible multiplayer experience, or a challenging experience that stimulates the player.

Games that once pushed the boundaries are now focused on character and story development. Wolfenstien: The New Order is no longer just a simple shooter, but a thought-provoking journey exploring the atrocities that made the Thrid Reich synonymous with evil. Grand Theft Auto V has players embark on a personal odyssey that pays that pays homage to the works of Jack Kerouac and Hunter S. Thompson. 

The last game that was able to get away with having a disturbing moment was Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, all thanks to "No Russian". Despite its horrendous content, the purpose was to simulate a terrorist attack while establishing the tone of the story. Another key detail that differentiates this from the games of yesteryear is that the level is optional - players are not required to participate in the massacre.

Somebody Wants Attention 

Ultra-violent or downright sadistic games are now less about pushing the boundaries and more of a gimmick to get attention. Last month, another unknown game developer caused controversy by releasing Kill The F****t, a light-gun shooter that has players kill anyone who is LGBT. However, this one-hit wonder only lasted two hours on Steam before being removed.

Another game that is about shock and no content is Gynophobia, a horror-survival that feels like it was developed just to pander the #GamerGate fringe groups. Outside the Steam community, there have been titles like Angry Trayvon and Bomb Gaza. Oh, and how could anyone forget JFK: Reloaded, a shooter that allows players to recreate the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

Destructive Creations may have gotten the attention of the gaming world, but this 15 minutes of fame will come at the cost of their reputation. As with people, a gimmick like this might get a developer noticed, but we gamers won't have any respect for them.

As Don Draper tells Pete Campbell in the first episode of Mad Men regarding actions and respect:

Keep it up, and even if you do get my job you'll never run this place. You'll die in that corner office, a midlevel executive with a little bit of hair who women go home with out of pity. Want to know why? Because no one will like you.

 

]]>
Hatred Review: At least it made people think https://www.gameskinny.com/zh5hb/hatred-review-at-least-it-made-people-think https://www.gameskinny.com/zh5hb/hatred-review-at-least-it-made-people-think Mon, 01 Jun 2015 12:19:39 -0400 Matt Amenda

Well, here it is. The game that kicked the hornet's nest. I know I've been waiting for this one for a long time. The other day I wrote a reaction article to Totalbiscuit's WTF video, and this morning I got to play it myself. I expect that most of you reading this will already know what Hatred is, but in case you don't I'll give you a quick sum-up:

You play as a long-haired freak in a trenchcoat. He hates everything. You go out and kill innocent people in a variety of settings. When the cops show up, you kill them. When the SWAT show up, you kill them too. When soldiers show up--you guessed it--you do your best to perforate those guys as well. You shoot people, stab them, set them on fire, blow them up with grenades. But mostly shoot them.

That seems like a hard formula to mess up. But I assure you, ladies and gentlemen, they most certainly did.

Even with everything on rock-bottom settings, the game ran like ass.

Bit of disclosure here: I played this on a Toshiba A10 Quad-core laptop. It is by no means a gaming rig. Bear this in mind when you read the next part.

Knowing that this was a game running on Unreal 4, I immediately set everything to low. I don't have a FPS counter, but I'd take a safe bet that it was well below 30 at the best of times.

I would normally just blame my machine for this, but during Totalbiscuit's impressions video, even on his famously monstrous rig, the game would not go above 30 FPS no matter what he did to it. So, yes, there are optimization issues. But I can forgive that on Day 1.

But it's worse than that:

My game was so broken that I couldn't finish the first level. Why? Because whenever I reached a low health state, the game would freeze. Then it would play a few frames. Then freeze again. Repeat until I died, helpless to do anything about it. Tweaking settings didn't fix it, going to Windowed mode didn't fix it, moving away from the area didn't fix it. I had restart the level and turn down the difficulty to Easy to get anywhere, and at about my fourth attempt to beat the level my game froze again and I decided enough was enough.

I was only able to clock in 58 minutes according to Steam. I'm sorry, but it was the best I could do with the game in this state. I would have played more if I could.

It's a shame, because even at low settings, the game actually looks alright. It's got this Sin City-style black and white and shades of red that I really dig. It makes the game feel dark and bleak and empty, as it should. The destruction was very impressive. Loved the fire effects especially. There was nothing quite like tossing a grenade into a garage and watching it all go up in flames.

You run around and shoot people. There aren't many frills on this one.

You execute not-quite-dead people to regain health. You get a crouch button, but no real cover system outside of that. You have a sprint button that's supposed to allow vaulting over low objects and jumping through windows, but is actually really janky and unreliable.

As you kill people, cops show up. Keep killing until the level is over.

This might have been entertaining for a while if the AI didn't suck so hard. A fair number of the bystanders don't even run away in the right direction. Some will run away, some will slowly jog to the left or right, and a bunch of them will even drunkenly wander towards you. I've had more fun mowing my front lawn.

The reaction forces aren't much better. There was a moment a remember after I slaughtered a house full of unsuspecting partiers when I heard the sirens coming. I took cover by a window and saw three cop cars pull up to the street outside. In that brief moment, I felt how I always imagined a spree killer would feel: cornered like a rat, nowhere to run, about to go out in a bitter blaze of glory.

Imagine my disappointment when one by one the cops marched right through the front door, where I blasted them with my shotgun like ducks at a carnival. They didn't have the brains to simply hang back behind their cars and fire, like a real police response might have done.

The terrible AI is the core reason this game has failed. At no point did I ever feel like I was killing a human being. Not once. Pretty significant failing when that's the ENTIRE POINT of the game. Any opportunity to set traps and ambushes, to feel like a hunter of men, is utterly wasted when your prey comes to you like a bunch of zombies. Even if my computer could play this game perfectly, it would get old really, really fast.

Our nameless trenchcoat 'hero' hates everyone and wants to kill everything.

That means that in order for the player to connect with the guy, at least one of two things has to happen: one, we also have to hate everyone and two, killing has to be satisfying. Well, I don't share this guy's worldview, and killing a bunch of mindless robots who can't hide or defend themselves is not fun. There goes all your player immersion.

As ran around killing these barely sentient sheep that this game calls people, I tried to determine what kind of effect the designers where trying to impress on the player. If it was to unleash the murderous psychopath that lurks in every human heart, as Santa Monica's God of War intended, it failed to do that because it lacked satisfying means of killing. If it was to make me questions my own motivations for why I enjoy hurting people in games, as Dennaton's Hotline Miami did, it failed because the action was neither abstract nor shocking enough to make me think.

If it was to make me feel guilt and regret for taking human lives, as Spec Ops: the Line did, it failed because no one felt human. My victims were only cheap puppets. Killing my empathy for human beings would have been great if it were intentional, most violent games I play do that anyway, and unlike Hatred, they manage to be fun.

I'm feeling some hate, alright.

I hate the terrible AI. I hate the lousy performance. I hate the failure to engage, entice, or excite me. It's $20 dollars on Steam for dull, pointless, and broken schlock.

If you want violent games that treat their violence in thoughtful, meaningful, and fun ways, check out any of the three superior games I mentioned above who did it right. Don't bother with this one unless you're really, really curious.

I wanted this game to succeed. I really did.

I mentioned this in my reaction article before and I'll say it again: I believed that this game would be groundbreaking statement about video game violence, a thought-provoking experiment in turning people into, for a moment, a mass-murdering monster. I loved all the talk and debate that sprung up around it.

Like any fine piece of art, Hatred made people think; people were talking about free speech and censorship, rights of the developer and consumer, societies of violence and the development of empathy, you name it. Destructive Creations was brilliant for letting the media do all the advertising for them, and while friends of mine were disgusted that this game was being made. I was ecstatic. I wanted to see how a game this deliciously controversial would turn out.

This is why it infuriates me that they would build up this pretense of being some edgy, no apologies studio that didn't back down or compromise for anybody, then give us...this. After all that, this piece of crap is all we get? Really?

They got my $20, but my respect for these guys is pretty much gone. It was all nothing but a bunch of hot air.

]]>
Reaction to Totalbiscuit's Hatred "Review" https://www.gameskinny.com/ew61q/reaction-to-totalbiscuits-hatred-review https://www.gameskinny.com/ew61q/reaction-to-totalbiscuits-hatred-review Sat, 30 May 2015 02:30:01 -0400 Matt Amenda

I've been looking forward to Hatred for ages. The concept of a title so deliberately amoral and violent fascinated me. I wanted to see how it turned out, even as everyone else seemed to want it nuked from orbit. As I watched it get lambasted by games journalists, kicked off of Steam Greenlight, banned from Twitch, and shunned by pretty much everyone else, I couldn't help but cheer it on as it refused to die. I never saw this a game that was begging for attention; I saw it as a bold artistic statement, one that would make people think about violence and explore the bounds of their own moral codes. I even managed to get an interview with Destructive Creations a few months ago back in my college magazine Gamezombie.tv.

But then I saw the gameplay footage on Totalbiscuit's Youtube channel, and boy does that guy know how to take the piss out of a game. What I saw bored me. And that makes me very sad.

This may sound odd to some of you, but I LOVE IT when games make me feel bad. To me, it's one thing if a game is able to make me happy and have fun. But if a game shocks me, horrifies me, or makes me feel guilt or loss or sorrow, that is something really special and worth treasuring. Killing Big Daddies in Bioshock and watching the Little Sisters cry over them still makes me feel awful to this day, and I love it. Watching people die in The Walking Dead makes me die a little myself, and I love that too. In the same way, I wanted Hatred to be an experience where would slaughter innocents and feel every death whittling away at my soul. That would have been momentous. That would have been worth talking about for years to come.

What I saw was just poorly animated dude in a trenchcoat gunning down a bunch of mindless NPCs.

The AI was not nearly intellegent enough to make the innocent bystanders convincing. The animations were not nearly visceral enough to be shocking. The armed response stupidly swarmed the protagonist with nothing resembling tactics or intelligence. Nothing about any of it felt real. And when it didn't feel real, it got boring to watch.

I don't care if a game is violent, obscene, horrific, shocking, or vile; the greatest sin a game can commit is that it bore me.

I breaks my heart that this game looks so mediocre. I'm still going to try it, but I'm not expecting the groundbreaking descent into madness that I was hoping for. If I'm lucky, I'll be allowed to review it. But if a game won't make me think about killing people nor let me have fun doing it, then what's the point?

]]>
No More Streaming Adult Only Games on Twitch https://www.gameskinny.com/9cvgj/no-more-streaming-adult-only-games-on-twitch https://www.gameskinny.com/9cvgj/no-more-streaming-adult-only-games-on-twitch Thu, 28 May 2015 21:11:48 -0400 Victor Ren

Down with the dirty puns, and out with the phallic humor because Twitch has now banned anyone from playing Adult Only games on their streaming service. Just recently the company posted on their blog, "Simply put, AO games are not welcome on Twitch" to let all gamers know that this should not be taken lightly.

Along with this, Twitch will also be updating their rules of conduct to allow everyone a "safe, welcoming, and inclusive" environment. The ROC will be changed to read that all AO games will be banned, instead of just Twitch just naming off certain titles.

There are very few titles that hold the rating of an adult only game. However it is very unlikely that an AO game could hold an audience, being that Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is the only title that comes into most people's minds. With that said, this is a step toward Twitch being more of a friendly website and avoiding any unwanted attention in the future, as it becomes more popular with the higher amounts of underaged children being attracted to the site.

This announcement comes before the release of the game Hatred, which is sure to have plenty of controversy surrounding it, given that it is a game about killing innocent victims. Furthermore, most fans in forums and comment sections are fine with the idea, as a lot of them probably couldn't name more than two games off the meager list.

]]>
Hatred Gets Adults Only Rating from ESRB https://www.gameskinny.com/lsu0h/hatred-gets-adults-only-rating-from-esrb https://www.gameskinny.com/lsu0h/hatred-gets-adults-only-rating-from-esrb Mon, 19 Jan 2015 09:02:57 -0500 Akeem Favor

The ESRB has given Hatred, the game in which your character goes around slaughtering people, an Adults Only rating. 

The Adults Only rating is one that is rarely used and is reserved for games that include "prolonged scenes of intense violence, graphic sexual content, and/or gambling with real currency." 

"Well, I'm not quite convinced why Hatred got AO rating while it lacks any sexual content, but it's still some kind of achievement to have the second game in history getting AO rating for violence and harsh language only," said one of the game's developers in the official forum.

"Even if this violence isn't really that bad and this harsh language is not overused. The guy from ESRB (by the way - very nice, polite and cooperative one) told me it's all about 'the context' which people they're testing gameplay video on will see."

What is Hatred

"Here comes our game, which takes no prisoners and makes no excuses. We say ‘yes, it is a game about killing people’ and the only reason of the antagonist doing that sick stuff is his deep-rooted hatred." 

In Hatred, the player takes on the role of a villain with a hatred of humanity who begins a mass murder spree.

According to the Destructive Creations, the developers of Hatred, they wanted to create a game that bucks the trend: 

"The question you may ask is: why do they do this? These days, when a lot of games are heading to be polite, colorful, politically correct and trying to be some kind of higher art, rather than just an entertainment – we wanted to create something against trends. Something different, something that could give the player a pure, gaming pleasure.

Here comes our game, which takes no prisoners and makes no excuses. We say ‘yes, it is a game about killing people’ and the only reason of the antagonist doing that sick stuff is his deep-rooted hatred."

Hatred made headlines when the game was pulled from Steam's Project Greenlight after reaching seventh place in votes before being put back up in less than a week

The violence found in Hatred isn't the most graphic I've seen in a game, though the context of the game, as mentioned above, is probably what is putting people on edge. 

That being said, I opted not to show the trailer for the game in the article, but you can watch it yourselves to form your own opinions (graphic content warning duly given and probably ignored)

]]>
Hating on Hatred https://www.gameskinny.com/vesoy/hating-on-hatred https://www.gameskinny.com/vesoy/hating-on-hatred Tue, 23 Dec 2014 06:41:19 -0500 Eric Nicolai

Hatred is a game that has caused a massive amount of controversy. As a person that supports media of any type, I want to make my stance clear now. I do not think that the game developed by Destructive Creations has crossed any lines. Video games, along with any form of entertainment, should no boundaries. The only boundaries are those that people create themselves. 

Hatred was initially pulled from the Greenlight section of Steam, but since the initial decision it has been put back up. Hatred puts the player in control of a character whom hates people and pins them up to kill civilians and cops alike. The player is to have no mercy when it comes to shooting, stabbing, or blowing up individuals. It seems as though pulling this game is a bit harsh of a move for what is supposed to be a fictitious world.

Although this is a new spin on a third person shooter it isn't like it's the first in killing people. State of Emergency that was developed by Rockstar Studios was not entirely concentrated on killing innocent people. However, that game did have a lot of it and sure there were people upset about the launch, but they got over it and the game still sold. Rockstar has created many video games that pushed the envelope in terms of violence and other controversial issues.

Even when stepping away from the video game industry and looking at movies these issues are still relevant (looking at Rampage (2009) as a prime example in this case. The movie is based on a killer who murders his way through a small town. SPOILERS: The protagonist ends up getting away after framing his friend as the killer by forcing him into a suicide position while wearing the killers armor. Although the killer had a motive of money he still slaughtered many innocent lives. This movie was not pulled; in fact when I watched it, it was streaming on Netflix. 

I feel as though gamers and non-gamers need to take a step back and look at a video game for what it is. They are made to be a form of entertainment and be taken just as that. Although Hatred is about a man running on a killing spree it is not conveying the message to do so. This game does not create any new controversy as the Grand Theft Auto series has made killing a controversy in the past. I do think that this attention as negative as it is could be good for the game developer; it definitely has sparked my interest. 

Do you think that Hatred pushes new limits or is it the same controversy of violence in video games? Comment below.

]]>
Gamergate, Hatred, and Gaming Culture https://www.gameskinny.com/px290/gamergate-hatred-and-gaming-culture https://www.gameskinny.com/px290/gamergate-hatred-and-gaming-culture Mon, 22 Dec 2014 08:52:58 -0500 Coatedpolecat

The term 'gamer' has been tainted by communities like Hatred's and some participants of GamerGate. From their conception hateful, immature people, reinforcing other negative gamer stereotypes have been running rampant. Recently the community around Hatred is becoming the norm for video game culture and it needs to stop.

Though some argue our culture has groomed this behavior. The type of cesspool culture that's become synonymous with GamerGate has seeped into Steam Greenlight. Since Steam reinstated the controversial game Hatred, the comments surrounding it are very reminiscent of the slander, libel, and hate speech from some GamerGaters.

Though, no direct ties to the hashtag phenomenon connect Hatred's community and GamerGate together, the hostility towards Social Justice Warriors/feminists/opinionated humans, are very similar from both groups. GamerGate and Hatred's community seem laser-focused on feminists and have very little civility in forums and on social media.

 

GamerGate History

Eight months ago some folks accused Zoey Quinn - who made Depression Quest - of sleeping with journalists in exchange for positive press for her game. Though these rumors and accusations are still unproven to this day, GamerGate can't seem to let it go.

The concern is: some journalists are building close relationships with developers and publishers, thus creating content that may be biased to favor those involved with the process. Regardless of this fairly legitimate concern, the slander and harassment used under the GamerGate banner overshadows any true or genuine intentions for sites to include/disclose said relationships.

The banner in which GamerGate attempts to flag is one about journalistic integrity within the games industry... I mean, because interactive entertainment journalism is such a grave subject. What would happen if Hollywood journalists didn't have integrity or even worse, music critics?

Actions and consequences

That's not to take away serious criticisms of diversity and inclusion in the industry, its games, or developers. If games want to strive as an art form, critical analysis is necessary. Anita Sarkeesian creates a series of videos about tropes vs women in gaming. A vocal portion of the Internet reacted with hate speech and misogynistic messages towards an array of feminists and "Social Justice Warriors" after this video.

This behavior by some gamers caused Universities to cancel talks by feminists such as Anita Sarkeesian due to death threats. They've taken photos of Briana Wu's house with floor plans, phone numbers, pictures, and more terrifying things all posted on the Internet - all associated with GamerGate.

Are gamers all the same? Does one title fit all? I don't know, but if it does, I want out.

These displays of power have caused some of these women to move and remain under police surveillance just to keep their pets, friends, co-workers, and families safe.

Over the course of eight months these people, mainly women, have had to shoulder this burden. To add to this toxicity a game has rallied a similar group of people. As the barrage of attacks on SJW's continues, a game Hatred enters Steam Greenlight and adds fuel to the fire.

Hatred breeds hatred

Hatred is a game about commenting a mass murder on unsuspecting civilians... All in the name of "fun." Steam originally took the game down to later send an apology letter and reinstated the murdering simulator.

Once reinstated, the forums for the Steam Greenlight lit up like the Griswald House on Christmas. Comments ranged from "can we kill children too" to an entire thread devoted just wishing feminist like Briana and Anita be put in the game to kill.


If they're gamers, am I?

There are many people I've seen and interacted with via Twitter, Facebook, and the like, but never once have I disliked or loathed someone as to hurt them the way this hateful culture surrounding 'gamers' has. Some have argued the term gamer is no longer applicable - that it's too general of a term. 

Which begs the questions: Are gamers all the same? Does one title fit all? I don't know, but if it does, I want out. Video games have earned this culture. The very diversity and understanding SJW's are striving to achieve in this industry, in our culture, can be accomplished by getting rid of the stereotypes and begin to move forward.

They've taken photos of Briana Wu's house with floor plans, phone numbers, pictures, and more terrifying things all posted on the Internet

With all the pushback regarding diversity in games, maybe the term gamer isn't just a generalized term anymore. Maybe we're just people who have a passion for a hobby - video games. If being a gamer means I have to associate myself with people like the Hatred community or GamerGate, I'm not a gamer.

Maybe games like Hatred, POSTAL 2, and the like are just what the gaming community deserves though. After all, isn't that what people have assumed all along? Whenever there's a mass school shooting, video games get the blame. And why not, if you were on the outside looking in right now, you would blame games too.

We all know the best way to express yourself is through death and rape threats. Maybe if we play our cards right we can start alienating people due to their console of choice... Oh wait...

@thatgregmagee 

]]>
Hatred Community Targets SJW's https://www.gameskinny.com/ei4dm/hatred-community-targets-sjws https://www.gameskinny.com/ei4dm/hatred-community-targets-sjws Wed, 17 Dec 2014 17:36:35 -0500 Coatedpolecat

There are times when I feel like the gaming industry might be turning a corner, then something mind-boggling happens. Recently Steam removed, then reinstated Hatred, a game about a serial mass murder, from Steam Greenlight. As a result, some people are asking for SJW's (SJW is a perjorative for socially minded people, an acronym for Social Justice Warrior) as targets for killing, maiming, and butchering in the game.

In the not so distant corners of the Internet exists a group of people who loath anyone willing to push the envelope of representation in video games. These people are typically outspoken about criticism in games some are in fact feminists (the SJW's in question).  


This week when the game Hatred got axed from Steam Greenlight, an outpouring of rage about censorship spilled over onto the Internet (Though, by law, it's not censorship since it's a privately held company). Unannounced, Steam reinstated the game into its Steam Greenlight section.

Now that Hatred is back on Greenlight, parts of the community are asking for SJW's, even some by name - Anita Sarkeesian - to become non-playable characters free to slaughter, maim, and otherwise kill.

This type of behavior is disheartening to see, and leaves a disgusting taste in my mouth. How would you feel after giving your opinion a collective group of people threatened you on a daily basis and now want to kill you in a virtual world too?


One would think if Steam almost didn't allow this game due to its content, they would monitor the comments. Maybe Brianna Wu - another SJW name requested from the Hatred community - said it best via Twitter.

This raises a few concerns. The inconsistency of the content Steam will allow needs addressed. Do they or don't they allow games like Hatred, Manhunt, and POSTAL 2 to exist on Steam? If Steam does keep Hatred on Greenlight, are they going to monitor the comments - specifically the ones asking for real people to kill, not to mention children as well. The kind of community surrounding this game worries me. It also solidifies that there are indeed a large number of people who thrive off this type of content and wish it were more extreme. 

How do you feel about Hatred, it's process on Steam, and the community its raised around itself?

@thatgregmagee

]]>
Valve Prohibits Hatred: Is This Censorship? https://www.gameskinny.com/1uh4n/valve-prohibits-hatred-is-this-censorship https://www.gameskinny.com/1uh4n/valve-prohibits-hatred-is-this-censorship Tue, 16 Dec 2014 06:40:39 -0500 Corey Kirk

I try to stay out of these types of debates, but I need to discuss the recent issue of censorship; first, a brief overview of the situation.

A few days ago, Valve decided to pull Destructive Creations' controversial game Hatred off of its Steam Greenlight service. Due to the conversations of morality surrounding Hatred’s premise of mass murder, Valve decided it did not want to sell the game on its sales platform.

http://blog.lesoir.be/moi-jeux/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/10/hatred_cops.0.0_cinema_640.0.jpg

Hatred developed by Destructive Creations

The gaming community quickly reacted, insisting that Valve is actively censoring Hatred by not allowing the game to release on Steam. The community argues that they see no reason Hatred should never see the light of day, while other controversial titles like Postal 2, or unfinished and buggy games like The Slaughtering Grounds continue to be sold.

Those with this view claim that this is no less than full censorship and that Valve should be required to sell the game.

http://coedmagazine.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/its-the-feds.jpg?w=640&h=640

Whether you agree with the supporters of Hatred, or the supporters of Valve, let’s look at the facts according to U.S. law, which Valve must adhere. According to the Federal Communications Commission, and the lackluster legislation surrounding censorship, corporations (or even industries) can censor themselves.

This is why we see the ratings on video games and movies. Those industries decided to have some sort of mechanism to allow for consumer choice and self-censoring when making purchasing decisions.

Because a corporation can censor itself, the staff at Valve can make moral choices that best reflect the corporation’s views. This includes not selling a game it deems too obscene. Of course, if Valve took an aggressive step and tried to get the game banned from being sold at all, through the legal system, then that is censorship. However, the simple act of prohibiting the sale of a game on its own platform is not unlawful censorship according to U.S. laws.

http://www.destructivecreations.pl/img/team.jpg

The Destructive Creations team.

With that said, it is a bit odd that Valve pulls Hatred off Steam when it still allows Postal, Postal 2, Postal 3, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Fallout 3, and all games that allow the killing of unarmed people. If they allow those games to sell, why can’t they sell Hatred? If not for the morality of it, what is causing Valve to have doubts? Is it because the game is too buggy? If that is the case, then games like The Slaughtering Grounds and Farm Simulator should be pulled immediately.

So what can we, as a gaming community, do about this decision? Absolutely nothing. Why? Because Valve is a power player in the gaming industry. Valve can do what it wants as long as it is lawful.  

Sure, I could tell you to “vote with your wallet” but you and I both know that almost never works, because for every person who decides to stop giving money to Valve, a million more decide to throw money at the screen, and even a million more during those infamous Steam sales. Can we collectively pursue legal action against Valve? No, because then we would be the ones censoring. We may or may not like the decision, but Valve has every right to make it. 

What are your thoughts? Do you agree or disagree with Valve’s decision to remove Hatred from Steam? 

]]>
Why Hatred Doesn't Deserve to be Banned https://www.gameskinny.com/npu91/why-hatred-doesnt-deserve-to-be-banned https://www.gameskinny.com/npu91/why-hatred-doesnt-deserve-to-be-banned Sun, 26 Oct 2014 20:03:42 -0400 Brian Spaen

A violent shooter coming out in 2015, Hatred, has sparked a lot of chatter on whether or not it's surpassed the limits of what a video game should contain. The game features players giving life to a misanthropist that wants to take things into his own hands and go on a hellbent mass murdering spree.

Laughably, some people are even calling for a ban on it. These thoughts are hypocritical.

Hatred could be one of the most brilliantly titled video games to hit the market. Why? There could be more vitriol from people out there against the game than the actual main character going around and shooting everything in sight.

You'd think people would finally be over violent video games years ago, but here we are, 21 years after Doom was unleashed upon us, and people still believe they're killing simulators.

Here's a look at the gameplay trailer. Obviously it's NSFW as it contains extremely violent content and strong language.


There's a lot of angles to attack this issue from. First, people have a hard time separating opinion and fact when calling for the banishment of Hatred. Just because they don't approve of the violent content in the game doesn't mean they should be able to prevent anyone else from playing it.

People have different tastes when it comes to video games. Seriously, what's the harm of somebody playing a psychopath in a virtual world that's roaming around the streets and killing innocent people? I don't recall that being against the law.

All violent forms of media should hold responsibility

Is there research and evidence that supports long-term impacts of violent video games? You bet there is. But even in that report there's not enough research to simply bash video games and not other forms of violence in media.

What about the countless mindless horror movies that have killing innocent victims for no reason? What about all the violence in today's popular TV shows? How about all the content in books that are available for EVERYONE at a library. How about violent lyrical content in music that can be listened to on a CLOCK RADIO!

But why bring up those things when it doesn't fit a critic's diatribe of panning a video game they only spent a minute watching a trailer for. Then they spew initial reaction that should instead be thought out.

Wanting a ban is hypocritical

Everybody has a right to give their opinion on a video game, and if Hatred is something that disgusts you, go ahead and write it. But don't call for a banishment of the game. That's limiting the developer's creativity.

It's essentially being a hypocrite. What if somebody was going to limit Person A's ability to write because Person B didn't believe Person A was socially correct in his writing? That's pretty dumb. And in contrast, it's not like the developer, Destructive Creations, actually believes in this stuff. It's entertainment.

It may amaze some people, but the widely critically acclaimed Journey isn't for everyone either. While I agreed with the public and loved the game, some people do consider it a complete waste of time. Believe it or not, some people will love Hatred.

Nobody should want a ban on an overly excessive violent video game. Don't restrict content just because it's not on a personal approval list.

Image credit: Games.com

]]>
Hatred is What Fox News Thinks Games Are https://www.gameskinny.com/sn7rm/hatred-is-what-fox-news-thinks-games-are https://www.gameskinny.com/sn7rm/hatred-is-what-fox-news-thinks-games-are Thu, 16 Oct 2014 13:21:18 -0400 Amanda Wallace

If you haven't heard of Hatred, you certainly will. The next time a lone gunman in a trenchcoat goes into a school or a mall to kill as many innocent people as they can before they die, this is going to be the game that Fox News loudly talks about alongside old staple Manhunt

What is Hatred? It's a mass-murder simulator. You play as a long-haired, trenchcoat clad dude (who looks like one of the members of Dethklok) who has decided that he wants to die violently and that the most effective way to do this is to kill as many screaming, innocent people as possible. 

Polish game developer Destructive Creations have created exactly the kind of game that the media thinks represents games as a whole. While GTA V and Saints Row and other open-world crime games allow you to go off the rails and kill civilians, in the case of Hatred this is the whole game. It was as if this game was created simply to be a point of moral outrage, to stimulate conversation about ethics. 

Destructive Creations writes on their website (after the half-hearted "don't do this, it's just a game" disclaimer): 

The question you may ask is: why do they do this? These days, when a lot of games are heading to be polite, colorful, politically correct and trying to be some kind of higher art, rather than just an entertainment – we wanted to create something against trends. Something different, something that could give the player a pure, gaming pleasure. Herecomes our game, which takes no prisoners and makes no excuses. We say ‘yes, it is a game about killing people’ and the only reason of the antagonist doing that sick stuff is his deep-rooted hatred. Player has to ask himself what can push any human being to mass-murder. 

The main character concludes his growly monologue saying "my genocide crusade begins here," but what really comes to mind is the sheer amount of controversy that this game is going to stir up. The developers write that the game is about "pure, gaming pleasure" as if the only enjoyment one gets out of games would be from mass-murder. 

Whatever their reasoning, Hatred appears to be coming. 

]]>