Crunch, Pop, Spray, Crack, Ooze, and NEXT-GEN!

I dont like gore at all in general... movies that focus on inflicting pain, or gratuitous violence (SAW etc) turn me way off... In gears it is ... animated

although I did peek at a certain persons embargoed execution on google video! Ruthless!

 

There's multiple reasons. I for one, claim to morbid curiosity, but I cannot speak for everyone. Others are just plain sick. Other's flock there to see the face of war. We got especially busy during the release of Al-Queda execution videos. My throng with Ogrish was a phase, and after I had virtually seen it all, I left the media and attended the forum. Which also grew tiresome. Racism was rampant, and flame wars are provoked. In a place where "LAWL" passes for wit, I decided to relocate to a place where intelligence reigns before hatred.

Which is why I am here.

 

It wasn't a plug. If it was I would have made it a link. However I'm not crazy enoguh to want to send people off to that place with just a simple mousecklic. It's a madhouse. In the word's most accurate sense and I do not recommend people go there.

I did once and it was plenty more than enough just seeing the front page. I certainly wouldn't want anything even remotely similar appearing in videogames for obvious reasons.

I can only just stomach beat em ups because people do NOT get murdered and get their limbs hacked off (other than in an obviously over the top and comical manner a la MK fatalities etc).

Many have experienced their loved ones beaten within an inch of their lives by thugs or other criminals. Possibly with lifelong handicaps as a result. Many have even been killed.

Creating accurate and realistic murder simulators if you like just doesn't sound right to me. We play computer games to have fun but I can't see ANY fun in that. It'd just be for the chock value. Seeing inner organs spurting forth and laughing nervously at the fountain of gore. It'd work a few times and then it would get tedious and mundane. We would become desensitised to it. Would the next step be raising the bar with shotguns that splash skulls open and handgrenades sending body debris flying all over - how far over the top can we go? Do we really want to go there?

In the end development effort that went into the graphic realistic portrayal of body punctures and other wounds could have been better spent elsewhere.

Anyway isn't there enough bloodshed in this world as it is; do we really need more on our video game screens? I don't think os.

Peace.

 

I remember feeling a little bit bothered with the way the grunts in Quake 2 would writhe around in pain after you killed them. I'm definitely not enthusiasting about accurately showing a death. For example, shooting a guy in the stomach and watching him bleed to death over the next several minutes as he he moans in pain just isn't what I want in a video game. If it's gotta be gory, go for Rise of the Triad, not ogrish or Faces of Death.

 

Your desires sound like a lot of sytem and development resources pissed away trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator. They sound like horse shit, if you don't mind me saying.

 

Which was my reasoning behind not creating a link to the site, or even mentioning it until it came up. Why point people in the direction of it? I know fully, from being a user in the past, the impact a website like that has. I don't condone people go there, or actively pursue reaching new peaks in violence in media. It exists at whatever current level it's at, and I'm not going to beg to be spoon fed it faster. But it being said, if you strive to achieve these levels, then yes visit there or another website like it. There are other, safer outlets for you to access all the the aforementioned "desires" Bab spoke of, without risking third party interference, and leaving it all within the walls of your own room. Violence, in all forms of media, has been on a steady incline. Here's a good example. Watch "Manhunter" then watch "Red Dragon." Both are the same movie, or same concept, only 16 years apart. One would notice instantaneously the violence in "Red Dragon" is far more emphasized. And that's only ONE example. Nowadays there's movies and games out that REVOLVE around violence. Movies like "Hostel" and "Saw" and games like "Manhunt," "Dead Rising," "Grand Theft Auto," etc. I worry most about impressionable minds more than us being deprived a little more bloodshed in our games and movies. Much like gun control, the most important factor is it getting in the hands of children, but the issue is difficult to dance around without revoking constitutional rights.

 

FWIW this is not the reason.
AFAIK only one of the manufacturers in Gran Tourismo had any issue with car damage, and I'm sure that could be negotiated around.
None of the manufacturers will let you use the cars to kill or maim people or have them explode into flames killing the driver, but thats not what people generally mean when they talk about GT.

 

Are you 100% on this? I might be wrong, but I seem to have a memory of refusal from some manufacturer which eventually lead to no damage modelling or that the cars can't flip over, but like I said I might remember it all wrong.

 

IIRC, in interviews around the time, that lead dude from PD said that system power was the main thing preventing him from collision damage, because he'd prefer to not do it at all than not do it very accurately. So maybe we'll see it in GT5.

 

Need for speed 4 also had a damage system and it included the more known brands so I think that wasnt really the problem unless all the manufacturers suddenly changed their minds.

 

I worked on a game with licensed vehicles, so I have a pretty good idea what the manufacturers will and won't allow.

 

So where do they generally draw the line? Would be interesting to know, unless it's secret.

Pace.

 

Heh... I guess youre anticipating a new Soldier of Fortune. As much as I would like to see more realistic decapitations, I feel next gen games should not put such a big emphasis on things.

 

I am guessing by the multiple post Bobcat has made he would enjoy Mortal Kombat.....

But frankly I find it pointless to put blood and gore in a game because although there are a wide variety of gamers from teens to adults I do not see developers creating AO games and limiting their potential audiance to only one group of people.

 

i'm not sure what you are trying to make a point about here. in the new best sports games there will be no option to choke your head coach or throw chairs at fans. will that stop you from buying those games? i feel as though at this point you are making it seem like at any time, in any game, you want to be able to veer off and cause random voilence. man, every game is not GTA (thank god) and to be able to even get to the level of detail you are describing i really doubt is possible, and even if it were, i'm sure developers have about a million things above it on the priority list.

 

Though a fighting option might be cool in icehockey games. You know, pretend you are Happy Gilmore and hit someone with your skate

 

Blood is not needed to make the game great. Good story and gameplay is.

 

Though you could argue about the story part... Chess doesn't have one, for example, neither does Formula 1 and Doom was the mother of all FPS without it as well.

Of course a good story can help to create a context for an action game and add weight and emotional impact; and RPGs, RTS games and such absolutely need one, too. It depends...