Is it possible for violence in games to go too far?

[Deleted]

I think it's a great example of why there's a debate that needs to be done.

I believe there is no acceptable reason to consider freedom of expression having an exception when the art form is a video game.

Therefore I believe any debate in regards to rules of art is pointless and should be only on entertainment and education level only, and thus is really not needed.

[Deleted]

Nah it's just graphics getting better and better, thus more realistic and well...graphic.

Original Soldier of Fortune was a huge shocker for its fully disemberable enemies
Carmageddon was a shocker but that was over the top edgy kid game - violence for the sake of it and making fun of it
Punisher had some really nasty torture depictions
Manhunt is an obvious example, a game trying to be a snuff movie
GTA series - meh, it's over the top and designed that way from the beginning

I remember being scared shitless for weeks after getting eaten by Rancor in Dark Forces II: Mysteries of the Sith when i was like 10 years old. There's no blood whatsoever in that game, but my own character getting swallowed with a loud gulp was graphic enough for a kid. Meanwhile I played carmageddon at the same age and didnt got disturbed.

Interestingly enough, character development plays a massive role in whether violence is disturbing or not. If the game doesn't make you care about characters you dispatch... well, you just do not care. Hence why "Hatred" didn't really shock anyone. Yeah, you're shooting things. Random nameless pixels that yell i have family and repeat 3 same sentences. You couldn't care less.

Now compare this to killing off a major character with strong relationship to you, as a player. Imagine if Ania Oliwa from Wolfenstein was headed for a gruesome death. Now you're talking disturbing violence. It's not the graphical portrayal. It's your tie to the character and the character development. No one cares for nameless pixels with 0 backstory. But players do care for well written, important characters.

[Shiny212]

Doesn't shock me in the least. This violence is relatively tame. To answer your question, no I don't think violence can go "too far".

[Zandalarian Paladin]

I believe there is no acceptable reason to consider freedom of expression having an exception when the art form is a video game.

Therefore I believe any debate in regards to rules of art is pointless and should be only on entertainment and education level only, and thus is really not needed.

As I've pointed out in a reply a little bit farther in the thread:

It's not a matter of if a game can be made rather than if a platform will accept to distribute it. If Sony and Microsoft refuses to publish your game because of these factors, if the occulus refuses to publish your game for the same reason... no matter the rules about freedom of expression, it's about a private company policies. If enough pressure is applied toward them, there's a big chance they put internal rules about these games. Hence why there will eventually be a debate about it.

I disagree with any kind of censoring, so understand I'm speaking of what might happen, not what I want to happen.

[JustintimeSS]

I found it more like an OH SHIT... OOHHHHHH SHIT moment than too graphic. COD sp has pushed the boundaries (no russian, suicide bomber in london, etc) on stuff but it's not senseless.

I believe there was a game about a dude who can just go out and murder people and the more people you murder in more graphic ways the higher your score (i dont remember the name). That game was a bit much even for me.

[AeneasBK]

I know this isn't exactly the most intellectually solid premise, but can we pls not pretend mass produced clones of the same game (a la Fifa or CoD) is "Art", it is to art what Macdonalds is to cuisine. Freedom of artistic expression is all very good, but these are not artworks they are churning out so it's kinda insulting to the genuine labours of love that some companies produce to use that argument as to whether they should be "censored" or not.

[Jtbrig7390]

It's not a matter of if a game can be made rather than if a platform will accept to distribute it. If Sony and Microsoft refuses to publish your game because of these factors, if the occulus refuses to publish your game for the same reason... no matter the rules about freedom of expression, it's about a private company policies. If enough pressure is applied toward them, there's a big chance they put internal rules about these games. Hence why there will eventually be a debate about it..

Just like there is Freedom of Expression Sony and Microsoft both have the right to say if something is allowed on there store.

Both have a Zero A rated game stance and thats why games like Hatred will not be placed on those platforms and that is there right. I am saying cutting content from a game by force and not by the choice of the developer is 100% wrong.

I don't entirely agree with this, as I believe that the stimulation through a game is more powerful than a movie/show. This doesn't mean I believe it has any impact in real life whatsoever, but since there's no studies about games made through VR yet, it's hard to know the real impact it can have.

How powerful it is really depends the person. Person A could give no fucks because its pixles but events like in GOT could unease them because its using RL people. Person B could be the other way around.

[Pull My Finger]

I know this isn't exactly the most intellectually solid premise, but can we pls not pretend mass produced clones of the same game (a la Fifa or CoD) is "Art", it is to art what Macdonalds is to cuisine. Freedom of artistic expression is all very good, but these are not artworks they are churning out so it's kinda insulting to the genuine labours of love that some companies produce to use that argument as to whether they should be "censored" or not.

What he said. I'm always totally amused by these "artistic freedom" and "freedom of expression" talks.

[Deleted]

As I've pointed out in a reply a little bit farther in the thread:

It's not a matter of if a game can be made rather than if a platform will accept to distribute it. If Sony and Microsoft refuses to publish your game because of these factors, if the occulus refuses to publish your game for the same reason... no matter the rules about freedom of expression, it's about a private company policies. If enough pressure is applied toward them, there's a big chance they put internal rules about these games. Hence why there will eventually be a debate about it.

I disagree with any kind of censoring, so understand I'm speaking of what might happen, not what I want to happen.

I understand your point and I think that won't happen mainly because there is large enough audience in want of portrayal of brutal violence.

A short passage from God of War III, a Sony exclusive with commercial success, shows the brutality of murderous rage and Black Ops 3 is years behind that. However if you really had a hard time watching that gif, this video is not recommended for you.



I remember saying out loud after I killed Poseidon: Fuck, that's awesome. And that's first 10 minutes of the game.

[Jtbrig7390]

I know this isn't exactly the most intellectually solid premise, but can we pls not pretend mass produced clones of the same game (a la Fifa or CoD) is "Art", it is to art what Macdonalds is to cuisine. Freedom of artistic expression is all very good, but these are not artworks they are churning out so it's kinda insulting to the genuine labours of love that some companies produce to use that argument as to whether they should be "censored" or not.

Just because you don't like it does not change the fact it is art. Also Freedom of Expression doesn't just apply to your opinion on what art is.

art1
ärt/Submit
noun
1.
the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
"the art of the Renaissance"
synonyms: fine art, artwork
"he studied art"
2.
the various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance.
"the visual arts"

[Beefsquatch]

That was extreme for you? Wasn't that graphic at all. Then again..I'm a regular at liveleak, so my views on such things may be..warped.

Anyway, as someone whose accustomed to seeing violence on video games/online, I actually don't like random violence for no reason. Take this video OP linked, it looks kinda stupid. Why is some random tin-man looking robot ripping someone apart? If it's just for shock value, I think it's cheap and lame.

If the "extreme" levels of violence in any kind of media (video game, tv, movie, etc) makes sense, and fits into the story or theme of whatever said media is trying to portray, then I'm all for it.

So to answer the OP's question, if done right there is no such thing as going too far in terms of graphic content.

[Jtbrig7390]

So to answer the OP's question, if done right there is no such thing as going too far in terms of graphic content.

If done wrong there is still no such thing as going too far in graphic content.

Ether people like it or they don't there is no such thing as too far.

[Kanegasi]

No, it is not possible for fictional violence to "go too far". However, it is possible for people to have a limit as to what they can view and even a mental state to whether or not they treat it as real and want to do it to other people. It is NEVER the fault of video games or television when a mentally unstable person harms other people.

[Deleted]

A leak of one scene in particular for Black Ops 3 was released on the internet yesterday. It's extremely graphic, potentially spoiling, so be warned before clicking:

http://gfycat.com/CarefulUncommonEasteuropeanshepherd

A similar scene happened in Quake 4, and that was released in 2005. So no, not really. We haven't really seen anything more violent in 10 years now.

The Quake 4 scene is here.

[Thelxi]

Of course it is technically possible. People probably wouldn't want to play that though.

[Jtbrig7390]

No, it is not possible for fictional violence to "go too far". However, it is possible for people to have a limit as to what they can view and even a mental state to whether or not they treat it as real and want to do it to other people. It is NEVER the fault of video games or television when a mentally unstable person harms other people.

This so much. There is no such thing as games cause violence and there is no such thing as going too far.

Ether buy the content or not. Places like Gamestop,Sony,Microsoft have the right to not sell the content but no one has the right to censor it.

[Fencers]

I am not even certain what is happening in that GIF of the OP. Is he punching a robot in the groin; the robot rips his hand off? Very confusing.

Speaking to the topic; No. At least there is no greater or lesser limit than that which is allowed by other works of creative fiction.

[Beefsquatch]

If done wrong there is still no such thing as going too far in graphic content.

Ether people like it or they don't there is no such thing as too far.

Well, I didn't mean too far as in "ermaghad, how dare they show that in a video game". More like "well that was unnecessary". Like say, bodies being mutilated and ripped apart in a game like Doom would be pretty normal, fits into it's theme. Now, adding this same kind of gore to say...Call of Duty. Seems lame and probably is only included for shock value.

[Jtbrig7390]

Well, I didn't mean too far as in "ermaghad, how dare they show that in a video game". More like "well that was unnecessary". Like say, bodies being mutilated and ripped apart in a game like Doom would be pretty normal, fits into it's theme. Now, adding this same kind of gore to say...Call of Duty. Seems lame and probably is only included for shock value.

I read what you said wrong then myfault.

I take it you mean too far as in it doesn't fit its just for shock. Not too far as in "O No's that gory bits don't belong in vida gamez"

This I can understand there is moments where it just doesn't belong but if they want to add it so be it thats there choice. I felt Until Dawn could use some sex scenes to fully be that B horror movie that it was LOL. But its not my place to tell them what they should and shouldn't put in. I can just say if I liked what is there or not and why and what I felt it lacks.

[ParanoiD84]

That black ops gif was nothing more then epic, can't wait.