I''m just curious, if machines are depicted as beating the living hell out of each other is it still violence? I love Game Design and it loves me back. Our Goal is "Fun"!

In the states, the ERSB gives Armored Core (giant robots w/guns game) a rating of "Damage done to realistic objects". So, I''d have to say, yes; the people who care about violence care about robot violence too. Whatever.

One "could" get really trivial with this but i''ll leave it with common sence i guess. Unless someone else wishes to express their opinion on the matter?!!?!?!

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

As I understand it, robots don''t get much protection in Germany, where they''re pretty manic about game violence. Carmaggedon had to change the pedestrians from people to robots that spurted oil instead of blood, for example, and that was okay....

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

That sounds a little stupid... It spoils the fun

-Chris Bennett ("Insanity" of Dwarfsoft)

Check our site:
http://www.crosswinds.net/~dwarfsoft/
Check out our NPC AI Mailing List :
http://www.egroups.com/group/NPCAI/
made due to popular demand here at GDNet :)

What i was thinking (it quite evil) is that you could make some very nasty violent games but hide it up by making it mechanised. Then you can say that no ones being hurt etc etc.

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Well, And that''s exactly what it would be ... EVIL !

What''s the point anyway ? I mean, the way you say it, it sound like you are just trying to overcome censorship (which in the example of Carmaggedon in Germany is quite STOOOOPID ...)

violence is jsut what it is, breaking stuff is ok, breaking people is bad, breaking images of people (robots) is ... well, that''s the question I guess.

Personnaly my wee sister watch TV with me and she doesn''t seem to be traumatized by violence, but I guess that''s because I watch with here and try to explain everything I can. The thing I am actually wondering is how desensitivited (is that a word) will she be ? I guess I''ll to Turing test her

youpla :-P

Well if you''re the type of person that thinks AD&D makes people worship Satan, and that kids seeing violence in games will make them murderers then:

"Violence" towards robots would at the very least make people who play games more destructive... yup.... that must be it. Makes kids regular juvenile delinquits (sp) and adults into unibombers... yup yup...

Carmageddon robots.... LOL.. and I thought Europeans were -more- sane than Americans!

===========================================
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.

-Albert Einstein

Ok, then a jack hammer being used is an act of mechanised violence. We know it isn''t becuase of it''s context. So violence is related to context. A man punching a brick wall.. is that violence (yes, i know it''s stupid but its a hypathetical question)?

Then you''ve got a tank blowing up another tank. That''s violence because (once again) of the context. And there''s another thing that makes something violent i think and thats being "Deliberate".

So would we agree that violence must be a -Deliberate- act to cause -harm-. It think what i''m looking for is -violent manner- that''s whats upsetting people not really violence.

stuff this i''m going to hit the dictionary once again

(gee''s it''s a big one too)

vi-o+lence n. 1. the exercise or an instance of physical force, usually effecting or intended to effect injuries, destruction, etc. 2. powerful, untamed, or devastating force: the violence of the sea. 3. great strength of feeling, as in language etc.; fervour. 4. an unjust, unwarranted, or unlawful display of force, esp. such as tends to overawe or intimidate 5. do violence to. a. to inflict harm upon; damage or violate: they did violence to the prisoners. b. to distort or twist the sense or intention of: the reporters did violence to my speech.

vi-o+lent adj 1. marked or caused by great physical force or violence: a violent stab. 2. (of a person) tending to the use of violence, esp. in order to injure or intimidate others. 3. marked by intensity of any kind: a violent clash of colours 4. characterized by an undue use of force; severe; harsh. 5. caused by or displaying strong or undue mental or emotional force: a violent tongue. 6 tending to distort the meaning or intent: a violent interpretation of the text.


Well how about that, there was numerous occasions there where it didn''t mention the need for humans, animals or any living organisms to be involved for something to be considered violent.







I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

quote: Original post by Paul Cunningham
Well how about that, there was numerous occasions there where it didn''t mention the need for humans, animals or any living organisms to be involved for something to be considered violent.

Precisely my point.
You don''t need to kill to be violent, you can kill without violence.

I think it was in Battle Isle that I first heard of a plot were the war was fought between robots, because it was a nice way to solve conflict without risking human lives (guess what, Battle Isle is german ...)

But my question for you Paul is, what do you care about violence for anyway ?
In France we have a saying about W.A.S.P. censorship (mainly americans) : "If you cut a female breast with a motor chainsaw it''s PG13, but if you lick this same breast it suddenly becomes PG16" LOL
Just to say that it''s sad to see that most of the time, no one care about violence anymore.

I wonder if you can make a game without any sort of violence.

Could you imagine a quake without violence ?
Where is it appropriate to use violence in a game, where do you draw the line between gratuitous and consistent with the context ?

this forum should be called philosophy of games, rather than design.

youpla :-P