Some developers are pushing back against violent video games - Gratuitous bloodshed and the rise of female gamers have contributed to a backlash

I've always thought the "violent video games causes violence" take was absolute bullshit. For the sake of playing devil's advocate, even if they did, why would they?

Context plays a big part in what's "acceptable" in terms of violence. Are you playing as a soldier? A fantasy warrior fending off demonic forces? An average man shooting up a grocery store? The context behind the violence is more important than the violence itself.

For example, let's use Killing Floor 2 and Call of Duty. Killing Floor has some of the juiciest gore and dismemberment physics out of any FPS, but you don't hear outrage about it because you're gunning down lab monsters. Call of Duty's gore has generally been subdued overall (World at War being an exception, what a gem), yet No Russian caused controversy. There's a pretty stark contextual difference between defending yourself from monsters and gunning down unarmed citizens in an airport. Still, it serves as a plot device to help steer the narrative, so I wouldn't call it "senseless violence".

The only game I can think of that had violence for no other reason than malice is Hatred, and that game has an atmosphere that felt like it was made by an edgy 17 year old who's mad at the world because his asshole stepdad keeps having loud sex with his mom and drinking all his Pepsi.
 
Hi there, would you like to sign my petition?
postal-petition.gif
 
I've always thought the "violent video games causes violence" take was absolute bullshit. For the sake of playing devil's advocate, even if they did, why would they?

Context plays a big part in what's "acceptable" in terms of violence. Are you playing as a soldier? A fantasy warrior fending off demonic forces? An average man shooting up a grocery store? The context behind the violence is more important than the violence itself.
the argument boils down to "someone might not get the context, thus get affected the wrong way". for example a kid grabbing a gun and going HAM, not being aware when you kill people, they win die. or shooting black zombies in africa making your racist...
they are "right", if you completely ignore for the sake of their argument that age ratings are a thing for a fucking reason, and that you can't bubblewrap everything for a few dipshits at the cost of everything else.

All non-violent city builders are really just business and logistics management when you get down to the core mechanics.
city builders are inherently violent because to expand your city you have to displace and kill existing flora and fauna, not to mention the environmental damage you inflict on later generations.

being virtual and all is no excuse, you're reinforcing and outright glorifying it. obviously.
 
Back