Excerpt:
Anomie; is a principle theorized by French sociologist Emile Durkheim and put plainly it is a state where norms (expectations on behaviours) are confused, unclear or not present. In your everyday cross section of modern life even the most asocial of people can share a common goal with a passer-by even if it’s just the basic goal of survival. We understand that every man woman and child wants to live and we are aware as a social norm that human life has value and that taking it is expressly forbidden. On the other hand in the world of games they make their own norms.
The Postal franchise celebrates 25 years with a new trailer looking back at 25 years of Mayhem.
You can go postal all over again in a new town with some familiar weapons.
Hey Poor Player takes a look at six of the most offensive video games ever created, featuring themes of violence and sex to outright exploitation and racism.
I don't find any videogame offensive. They are made up fantasy tales NOT REAL PEOPLE. If you get offended over say a videogame or movie then im sorry but you just won't be able to handle the shit that really goes on in the real world. People need to grow up and take a look at the disgusting stuff happening in their own backyards, instead of crying and bitching over made up virtual world violence. In fact a War game i find the most offensive if i have to pick a stupid thing. War is simply brutality murdering and getting away with it FACT.
i'm against anyone promoting violence through any medium. I don't think disgusting things that happen in our world needs to be used as entertainment. People being offended isn't always bad, although people are getting offended by anything these days.
(Just to be clear. I don't believe games such as Call of Duty or Battlefield promotes violence. Although it would be nice to see war portrayed from more than USA's point of view.)
I agree, that I would like to see war games from the perspective of other countries. Almost every game has the US as the good guys (lol), when in reality, the US invades more countries than anyone and has been involved in some sort of occupation or war since it was founded.
So in your eyes war games do not promote violence though war itself is one of the most violent acts the world endures.
I think the entire list of offensive is laughable as every person has their own level of being offended or not. But the idea of promoting violence and then saying the most violent event of war does not in fact fall into the category is a bit naive.
And yes... I like my offensive war games.
@_FantasmA_ - point being that you market to your user base. The vast majority of the game market base is US. Selling a game outside of the market base is an option for sure but you are just limiting your sell numbers. There are games out there that do focus on less of a US being the good guy in the narrative. But they are small and don't reach market base.
So if you are a country minding your own business and another country invades you, as you defend yourself to save your family, friends, home, and way of life you are just murdering and getting away with it. I'll be sure to tell my family in Norway that when Operation Weserubung began, they were just murdering Germans who obviously showed up to invade Norway with 6 German Divisions, Uboats, cruisers and destroyers, as well as other ships including the battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau and Nazis were simply killing our fellow Norwegians for their own good. Fighting back was murder. Got it. The paltry number of 10K plus dead Norwegians from WWII was deserved and we should have let more die instead of murdering Nazis.
Yeah, so much for your facts.
I'm not saying it like that. But truth is defending your country or not war is still murdering for a faceless pussy government who don't like getting their pathetic hands covered in blood so pay some poor saps to fight to the death mainly over which country has the biggest dick or made up men in the sky's. But also just out of my own personal opinion i would fight to the death for my family yes, but my government and country can go and do their own dirty work..
You have a lot to learn about history. A great many people go into a war without being sent by their government. A lot of people do it because without someone taking a stand there will be no homes, no family, and yes no government left. Sure there are cases which occur where the government for greed or what have you starts a war.
But you made a blanket statement and it is wrong. Quite often you have to go somewhere and take action because you cannot stand idly by. Lack of a response only serves to encourage a bully. I do not believe sitting by and saying, "We'll let this guy kill X number of people before we act." That is what happened with WWII where everyone, people like Chamberlain were so afraid of another war they let Hitler get away with murder, literally, and all it did was encourage him.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Have you ever heard that? What about this:
“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse. When a people are used as mere human instruments for firing cannon or thrusting bayonets, in the service and for the selfish purposes of a master, such war degrades a people. A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice; a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their free choice, — is often the means of their regeneration. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever-renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other.”
Ok but the fact i was trying to make is that out of all these so called offensive games was people go nut's about how game a is offensive or how game b is racist. But when it comes to games about war where you are killing every 2 seconds nobody bats an eyelid over the violence.
There was a game on steam for a short time called kill the faggot. If you dont find that game offensive you are sick in the head.
Never heard of it. But i bet it was not about what it sound's like. In fact here in the UK we have a food made from pork called Faggot. So is that offensive too.
It is exactly what it sounds like. Watch gameplay if you dont believe me, you kill gay and trans people. I'm really not sure what else you would expect it to be.
I have no idea what you think pointing out a different usage of the word is supposed to prove. The game is messed up because of the context, and calling someone a faggot to demean them is also messed up.
As someone who is also from the UK, while yes, we have a food called faggots, it obviously is just a food. When you are called a faggot I can 100% reassure you that nobody, and I mean nobody, is calling you food.
Basically: I agree with you, cpayne.
Yeah I don't understand how simple human decency can just be disregarded like that.
"But also just out of my own personal opinion i would fight to the death for my family yes, but my government and country can go and do their own dirty work.."
And exactly what do you think would happen when your country gets invaded? If everyone in your country had the same opinion your family would likely be killed, or possibly even worse.
As long as a country isn't out doing shady things with their power than military might is absolutely necessary. I think thats the point "stupidusername" was making.
Even if your country is 100% peaceful, they could still enter into a war in self defense and end up having to kill people on the opposing side. It isn't always cut and dry. People need to defend their home, beliefs, and way of life. That doesn't make them murderers when they have to kill an invading army.
Two sides to a coin, men and women are trained to defend and, or attack. There is no glory in killing, if you see someone acting like that then it's odd behaviour and should be mentioned.
Replies(2)
These games aren't even subtle in their delivery. It's like they're intentionally pushing the envelope as far as possible.
id rathe die on my feet than live on my knees!so emile...go F yourself
Interesting, I've just started to re-play Two worlds II and I was thinking about the idea of freedom leading to boredom last night, the best open world games are the ones which delay gratification to some extent, having to unlock areas of the map to progress or having zones which are impossible for low level characters to complete keeps people playing longer, I think. I've tried 3 times to get into Skyrim and when I hit the 40 hour or level 30 mark I start to get bored and find excuses to go and read or watch TV, being a guy I like a long term project but bouncing around a huge, empty tundra looking for emergent gameplay just seems a waste of time to me.
Agreed
It doesn't work for everyone. Some people can only thrive with complete- or near-complete- freedom. Others work best within the framework of some sort of externally imposed limits. For many, it depends on the task at hand.
Gimme a mix of both. Freedom when I need it, limitations where necessary.
Absolutes(black and white situations) are rarely ever correct in more than the most general of sense.