I was thinking about this the other day with a group of people on IRC. Has gaming reached the "everything for shock value hate your parents" adolescent stage in it's life? It seems now that every other game involves some form of extreme profanity or nudity, or gore beyond belief, all for what? WHY is it there? It's not necessarily FUN or even INTERESTING. It seems like the only purpose it was done was for some sorry attempt at obtaining a shock value. I signed online and opened up Netscape to the home page and saw an article about a playboy playstation game. This in conjuction with games like BMX XXX. What was the real purpose of any of this? A great big "lolz look at me haha im so kewl yeh lol u r not sa kewl as me im so gr8 lololololol" Recapping, everything until GTA3 was the growing up area. Getting through midget school.. learning the basic ropes of what's right and wrong. Getting in trouble for doing naughty things (MK being slammed by Lieberman, GTA 1 and GTA 2 coming about, the FPS genre in general). Now it seems like gaming has started into middle school, and it's running around piercing it's tongue and mutilating it's body with various appendage enhancements and styling it's hair in colors that clash so nastily with it's clothes that most people can't even bear to look. My real question is, when will it grow the hell up? I'm tired of games full of huge, polygonal breasts and dogs screwing each other and nailing a guy in the head with a shovel because he's stupid and screwing badly rendered hookers in a lacking model of a car for health. Are these people really so sad to the point that they need 3D porn? Just watch a movie, damnit. Quit polluting my games. If the only reason someone can think of to play your game is because "LOL U GT 2 C TITS," then maybe you shouldn't have made the waste of technological resources that is your game. -Bajiroshi [Edit: Inconsistency, and a minor grammar error.] [edited by - Bajiroshi on May 19, 2003 11:02:38 AM]

Your post shows a great deal of maturity and good taste.
May the flames be few....

quote: Original post by Bajiroshi
If the only reason someone can think of to play your game is because "LOL U GT 2 C TITS," then maybe you shouldn''t have made the waste of technological resources that is your game.

Games like this don''t tend to sell very well. Generally, people play games because they are fun, the presence or non-presence of tits is just a bonus.

Also, your argument might seem less hypocritical if you adopted a more mature tone yourself.

Games like GTA3 and DoA:EXTREEM VOLLAYBAL do well because they''ve got good gameplay wrapped in a familiar package. GTA has the previous runs and the whole "gangsta/hoodlum" motif, DoA has (from what I''ve heard) a solid volleyball game and a sort of dating-sim thing going on.

quote: Now it seems like gaming has started into middle school, and it''s running around piercing it''s tongue and mutilating it''s body with various appendage enhancements and styling it''s hair in colors that clash so nastily with it''s clothes that most people can''t even bear to look.

This analogy made my day. :D

You''re being pretty unreasonable - theres plenty of games that are good quality that don''t go for shock value:
Animal Crossing
Pikmin
Rez
Deus Ex
Theif
Mr Driller
Space Channel 5
Unity
etc.

(apologies for the short list, i''ve not been following current events much).

Ahh, stuff like this drives me nuts, but I guess I can't be too upset because I used to be just like Bajiroshi.

So to you, I say this. Games are like they are because companies make them and consumers like them. Who are you criticizing? The gaming industry? They are just making what sells, and that is what people want. So you can't criticize them for making what people want, because they're just fulfilling wants, which is what every business does. If you don't like this, criticize capitalism.

Are you criticizing society? Great, join the millions with a voice but no action. Society isn't going to change because you hate what they like.

If you want to prove to everyone that you don't need blood and nudity to make a good game, then do it. Make a good game without these aspects. In the meantime, let society do what it does and spend your time making contributions rather than criticisims.


--Vic--

The future of 2D game development:
Flat Red Ball

[edited by - Roof Top Pew Wee on May 19, 2003 12:33:26 PM]

By default, anyone insulting another''s maturity in cases where immaturity is not immediately obvious is guilty of the crime of which they accuse the other.

Moving on! There are still many developers that aim to make a genuinely good game. Most developers stay away from shock value; remember, the designer has to go through management first, and management is wary of anything that sounds new or unique. And shock value just doesn''t sell. Gameplay sells. Hype sells. Even if a developer WANTED to make a game that was a compressed ball of shock value, he would probably not get funding for his idea, because nobody would publish it.

Grand Theft Auto 3 was not aiming for shock value, I don''t think. Maybe the first was, but I doubt even that. In my opinion and my opinion alone, it was simply a unique idea that was never meant to drive certain senators insane or cause the elderly of the civilized world to lock their doors in unison. There aren''t as many controversial ideas that have been implemented as there have been noncontroversial ideas, and as people become more and more jaded, once-controversial new ideas become accepted and used. Twenty years ago this never would have made it out of production, and no, it''s not because the PS2 didn''t exist then. Though that''s a valid reason too, I suppose. It''s because the moral barrier is slowly lowering itself, and every centimeter it goes down allows us a glimpse at concepts once taboo.

DOA: Xtreme Beach Volleyball is an entirely different matter. Like GTA, its aim is almost certainly not shock value; however, GTA was an interesting idea that was implemented well enough to be a commercial success, and Xtreme Beach Volleyball is softcore pornography with mediocre gameplay hastily taped onto the side. That''s not aiming for shock value; again, shock value doesn''t sell. That''s aiming for your target audience, which in this case happens to be "lonely wankers." Personally, I don''t see the point of buying a game like Xtreme Beach Volleyball when pornography is freely available online, though you are (as ever) welcome to release the rabid dogs of flame war upon me for saying so.

To summarize, for all of you that skip to the last paragraph of every post, I find it unlikely at best that any game would aim for shock value. That a game would shock and disgust people is likely, but different, for the developer would have no reason whatsoever to make that his chief aim. The line between morally acceptable and taboo is constantly moving rightwards, but it does so at an exceedingly slow pace, and the line is but an average of opinions. Remember, what the developer probably considers acceptable (or acceptable enough to not kill sales, at least) may be what you consider absolutely horrifying. Such is the price we pay for living in a world where morality is ever changing.

I do not agree with you. GTA3 wasnt made to be some game for immature little children looking to seem cool. GTA3 was taking a step towards reality. I myself was sick of games where there is only 1 road that goes in a circle, it was impossible to hurt anybody, and there is no way to get out of your car. GTA3 made it seem real. Nobody said you had to baseballbat people till they die then take their money, but you can do it in real life and if a game is trying to simulate real life then why shouldn''t you be able to do it in a game. GTA3 was made to simulate real life by taking away all those boudrys they give you in game allowing you complete freedom. The hookers probably crossed the line but the rest of the game didnt. As for beach volleyball and bmx xxx i cant say the same, but most movies with porn hardly get criticised so why should games.

I tend to agree with Bajiroshi. Not all games have to be blatantly obvious about having shock value to be immature, bawdy, or simply lowbrow. Indeed, the vast majority of games offer nothing more than a visceral and superficial experience...exactly what the "new" MTV generation wants (I consider myself the "classic" MTV generation when they still had VJ''s that actually played music videos). Games for the most part about being cool, looking cool, or doing something which though unrealistic is "fun". It''s like all games want to follow the mold of mindless teen movies in the Animal House, or worse "Where''s My Car Dude?" vein.

Very few games offer gripping and intellectually stimulating backgrounds or stories. Few games have gameplay which goes beyond skill, and introduces choice and decision-making from a personal level. Games are stuck in the same era that comic books did during the 50''s. Ironically, before the Comics Code Authority came out during the McCarthy era and basically made fire and brimstone tales about how comics were perverting our youth, comics were not only your 4 color standards like Action Comics (Superman) or Detective Stories (Batman), but also comics dealing with horror and adult situations (yes, the naughty and the "mature" kind). But after the CCA came out, comics had to gear towards teens and kids exclusively, otherwise it wouldn''t get the CCA seal of approval. It wasn''t until Dark Knight Returns and The Watchmen, that comics finally broke out of that mold and started telling adult-oriented stories again.

Games are in the same boat apparently. Imagine for a second if all war movies were like Rambo or Missing in Action, instead of Saving Private Ryan, We Were Soldiers or Full Metal Jacket. We''re stuck in the Rambo phase of gaming.

I disagree. I think that a lot of games are out there that don''t have much shock value at all. The Sim games are non-violent, non-action, non-shocking and are broadening the horizons of the gaming industry and changing the image of video games in our culture. Halo pushed the boundaries of FPS AI, and others will no doubt continue to do so. Strategy games, role-playing games, and puzzle games are still around, and doing quite well. There''s no justification for a rant about the immaturity and shock value of video games right now.

Of course there are games that are designed and marketed for shock value. There always have been and there always will be. I liken video games to comic books in this regard: Most are shallow and silly, but the ones that aren''t stand out and the crappy majority cannot detract from their value. I''d say this is a golden age for video gaming. The people who grew up with games are old enough to contribute meaningfully to the industry, and the people that remember the very beginning of games are all mostly still around. Genres have been established, but not so concretely that the art has gone out of the work, and styles f design are distinct and inspiring.

As well-written and amusing as the analogy may have been, there is no merit in likening the gaming industry to an adolescent. The maturity is there, more than it ever has been before, and only the most puritan of worldviews would be clouded by the more risque or vulgar elements. Everything that was said in the thread-starting post could be said about movies, or television, or even newspapers and literature. There is a slackening of the rigid moral systems that restrained expression during the first few hundred years since the renaissance, but that''s not a flaw in society.

So, in conclusion, games are better than ever, and the more crude bits aren''t a degradation of the medium, merely an expression of the world''s changing ideology.