nX3286d ago

Looks alright from a gameplay perspective but I'm not quite sure whether I can have "fun" while playing this...

ArchangelMike3286d ago (Edited 3286d ago )

The gameply looks solid to be fair, if only it had some other purpose beyond simply, "murder all innocents for your sick pleasure."

I remember when Manhunt came out - I absolutely loved that game - even though it was getting absolutely trashed by the media. The thing about Manhunt, it had character (remember Pigsy), and it had a story and it actually had pathos. By the time I got to Starkweather I was just so happy to shoot him over and over again for what he had put me through. Now that was an engaging but violent game.

This on the other hand definately doesn't have the character, story or pathos that gives much needed context to the violence. That ISIS video game that got banned seems to have more purpose than this.

3285d ago
Intranquill3285d ago

@logicalreason, the devs themselves said there's no higher ground for the game. There is no story or reasoning behind it. They want you, the player to come to with why he's doing what he's doing. Why he's so angry. So whether he was just assuming or not, he's right.

No source as its late where I am and I don't care enough, I just wanted to correct you. He may be acting like a game journalist, but you're acing like a typical gamer troll.

MasterCornholio3285d ago (Edited 3285d ago )

If I'm not mistaken in manhunt you kill criminals and psychos. I'm not saying that they developers shouldn't make hatred but I understand why some people might hate the game.

Its like if someone made a game about going to school and shooting people. Sure the game might be fun for some but others will find it quite offensive.

ChronoJoe3285d ago (Edited 3285d ago )

You can see it as endless survival if you like.

Isn't this what half of the people do on GTA all of the time. Murder civs till cops chase you and try to put you down, murder cops? Only difference is that this is contextualised within the characters narrative... in GTA, it's arguably more disturbing as these are the actions the player chooses to take, unprompted by the game.

This game is ultimately, for those people. To deny there is an audience, is to deny that people don't take enjoyment from similar actions in other games.

Heck, GTA even used to contextualise this kind of violence with the 'rampage' type modes.

In honesty, I think it's nice not to play the Hero, for once. The beauty of virtual worlds stems from the freedoms they grant, yet people, and developers chose to pose players into directly relatable characters, who's actions and mindset mimics what's considered a 'typical' human. I argue, that this is boring, and games like Hatred that offer the opportunity to partake in the actions of someone with a mindset divergent from typicality can be genuinely interesting, creative experiences.

hay3285d ago

It's a freakin Postal. I'm surprised people still have sand in their vaginas over it. And this is exactly something we've been doing in GTA games for over the years.

There's a special place in hell for hypocrites I heard :D

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3285d ago
lemoncake3285d ago

Well at least it will be a bit different than the endless zombie games we seem to get now.

DevilOgreFish3285d ago

"Hatred - "Human Shields" Gameplay Trailer"

I respect freedom of creation, but it's obvious to see wrong in the idea of harming people that have no intentions of fighting back. had the citizens all had weapons and never gave a sht i would have said fck it, why not.

hangdang3285d ago

I have a problem with your statement because you aren't harming anyone. Nothing in the game involves real people, it's a bunch of code meant to look like people. There are no "innocent people" dying when you play this game

Mulletino3285d ago

Haha I actually feel bad when I accidentally kill innocents in games where you get that capability. Obviously I'm not gonna start crying or anything but I can't say that I don't give it a second thought. Needless to say I won't be playing this game and my personal prediction is that hardly anyone will.

Meltic3285d ago

I dont care what people say. Still gona play and buy this awesome game. Just look at GTA isnt that just killing and stuff?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3285d ago
DarkOcelet3286d ago

Why is this adult only? Most of this can be done in GTAV if you choose to do it.

I think Rated M should have been the right choice.

ArchangelMike3286d ago

ermm... the game concept behind Grand Theft Auto had alot more going for it than just "murder innocent civilians in the most horrific way possible". In fact, not only does Grand Theft Auto NOT require you to murder innocents, but infact you can play the whole of Grand Theft Auto without murdering anyone (you can simply knock them out with a punch).

This game on the other hand has no other premise but to glorify murdering innocents for sadistic pleasure. The AO rating is appropriate and well deserved.

DarkOcelet3286d ago

But i am just saying it can be done in GTAV. So shouldn't it get the same treatment. I know what you mean that this game glorify murdering innocents but its not like you don't kill innocent people in GTAV.

What about all those cops lol?

Lamboomington3285d ago (Edited 3285d ago )

@DarkOcelet

What you're saying holds true only if it's the IDEA of killing people we're talking about.

That isn't the case here. Sure you can do all that in GTAV. You can also do some of it in Just Cause I'm sure. That isn't the point. No one cares about the fact that you are killing an npc.

It's simply about presentation.

Does GTAV have a grim, deathly, horror movie tone ? Does it have a story/premise of violentky stabbing innocent npcs while they earnestly plead for their lives ?

No. The tone, the setting ----> the presentation - is different. When I kill someone in GTAV, I couldn't care less. I'm more interested in seeing the Euphoria physics system in action once I hit someone with a car. That's simply because GTAV is set up that way - it's presented that way.
Even a Hatred dev made a comment about GTA saying it was violent, but that the violence was served up cleverly, so it didn't feel violent - which is spot on, I think.

Hatred is designed to shock/disgust people. GTAV isn't.

ArchangelMike3286d ago (Edited 3286d ago )

It's the overall context of the game. If the developers of Hatred put the violence in a context it would be a very different story. GTA has a context, heck even Manhunt and Postal had a context, and moreover the context of GTA V (and Manhunt) does not require you to murder innocents. It does not require to murder cops either.

A game that gives you no other option but to murder innocents, without any context to define the purpose of the violence, has defined itself as Xrated. The devs don't really need to censor the game, they just need to add context to the violence.

JackBNimble3285d ago

If you were an advocate against violence then I may have bought your B.S. but then you list off GTA, Manhunt and Postal. It sounds to me like you just need to have some justification to commit these violent acts in these games to make yourself feel better.

Context or not, manhunt or Postal are not that far off of Hatreds level of glorifying murder for fun.

BTW, I am all for video game violence as long as it's left to the adults, and hell , I just might buy Hatred too.

003285d ago

the game is just to brutal for them normal people, even though they don't complain about that torture scene in GTA5, going on a rampage is just to much for them.

NecotheSergal3285d ago

I remember doing much worse on The Punisher on Xbox Classic.

People seem to forget that Punisher exists and also Postal 2. That and apparently 'thugs' and gang members don't have Rights and freedoms and Thugs being tortured is okay because they've done criminal offences. Though if it's insinuated the people being killed and tortured are innocent. WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY. Cause innocent people have more feelings than thugs and gang members :p Apparently.

CorndogBurglar3285d ago

You missed a very important part of your own comment.

"Most of this can be done in GTAV IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO IT".

That might not seem like a big deal, but it is. Because in GTAV the entire point of the game isn't to go around killing innocents. In fact, you get punished for it by having the cops and national guard come after you.

In Hatred, the entire point is to slaughter as many innocents as you can. You cannot even progress in the game if you don't do it. Rather than getting punished for it, you get rewarded for it.

So there is a big difference.

003285d ago

I don't see the difference between getting 5 stars in GTA causing mayhem to causing mayhem in black and white.

I think people are just trying to make excuses for the actions they take in video games, by making it sound like it has more meaning then it actually does in the case of GTA. pretending to be high class so one can sit on their high horse.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3285d ago
ArchangelMike3286d ago

I'll pass, thank you very much. Not my cup of tea. I prefer my games with a hint of class.

morganfell3285d ago

Day One purchase. And implying a game doesn't have class because it doesn't make pretenses about violence "Well in this other game you DON"T HAVE to murder people" is just a tad arrogant, and dishonest.

mkis0073285d ago

I dont like agreeing...but it is accurate as far as I see.

3285d ago
FreakOrama3286d ago

Excited for this game, but yea I was kind of hoping for a story or something, but hey at least there will be side objectives and whatnot.

003285d ago

That destruction look great, can't wait for this game.

Show all comments (66)
520°

Controversial "Adults Only" Murder Simulator Hatred Is Coming To Nintendo Switch

A game about killing people.

Read Full Story >>
nintendolife.com
NecrumOddBoy1474d ago (Edited 1474d ago )

This game was just gratuitous violence. I don't know why it was rated AO. It's no worse than a GTA killing spree, Hotline Miami, or even the 'No Russian' COD mission. Reminded my of a weaker Dead Nation except no zombies.

FlyingFoxy1474d ago

And we have highly sexualised Japanese games like Senran Kagura which are often either borderline, or practically straight up soft core.. and not even rated AO, some even rated lower age than GTA!

Makes you wonder what's wrong with the ratings systems overall tbh, potentially exposing kids to all kinds of nasty stuff.. but then that's more the parents fault anyways, and the upper age ratings are definitely nowhere near kid friendly, yet you still get little kids playing certain things they shouldn't be.

StormSnooper1473d ago (Edited 1473d ago )

Sex should not even be an issue. Violence, on the other hand, should have restricted access. I don’t know anything about this particular game, but sounds like the difference between this and GTA is that GTA is a game about mafia, so violence itself isn’t the lure of the game. It’s telling a story. But a game about murder, is a game centered on murder as the selling point. I Don’t know, I see a difference here.

1473d ago
StormSnooper1472d ago (Edited 1472d ago )

@genericgamer01
We are confusing a number of issues here:

1) I think we all agree that any outright censorship is bad.
2) violence does in fact have negative impact on young kids.
3) as a matter of public welfare, some things are not better left to the unchecked discretion of people, in this case parents. This is why we all obey traffic laws.
4) while the right to raise your children how you see fit is a fundamental right, not all parents know how/are able to raise their children in a proper way, and the rights of the child and society should also be considered. Unfortunately, while we get a manual with everything, and attend classes for things like driving, a child does not come with a manual and no classes are offered to parents about how to raise a child.
5) there is a strong interest in protecting those in our society who do not have a means of protecting themselves. This includes children who cannot protect themselves from bad parenting.
6) we do in fact have experts in every field, both inside and outside government, who have dedicated their lives to specific fields, and DO know more in that subject than the general public. (To argue otherwise is called anti-intellectualism, which is a major problem in our society today, i.e. flat earthers)

Therefore, we should have regulations that guide parents, and also prohibit them from allowing their young to engage in activities that are either damaging, or have the propensity to derail their development into functioning positive members of society.

Lastly, the issue of politicians using video games as a means to seem tough, is an altogether separate problem as these individuals should not be allowed to take the reigns from experts on matters of public policy without scientific support.

PurpHerbison1473d ago

I guess the biggest difference here is the goal of Hatred is to murder where as GTA isn't all about killing sprees, Hotline Miami is too cute to be taken seriously, and COD isn't all about wiping out Russians. Best comparison is probably Dead by Daylight where 50% of the game is being a serial killer trying to kill survivors in gruesome ways and it is only rated M.

Kostche1472d ago

shooting and killing people is shooting and killing... dont matter what form it is

1473d ago
CptDville1472d ago

Have you ever tried Manhunt? It was quite disturbing when launched.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1472d ago
Tetsujin1474d ago

I'm surprised Switch is getting this and PlayStation/Xbox isn't. The game was basically Postal with better graphics and more realism.

LOGICWINS1473d ago

I'm not. Sonys the one that's been caught censoring anime bikini girls. Nintendo has been vocal about being against censorship.

https://www.google.com/amp/...

https://www.exclusivelygame...

REALAS1473d ago

Haha. Only with the switch, because money. Nintendo has censored more games than anyone.

Segata1472d ago

Nintendo will censor their games but not 3rd parties. That's what tey said since few will click any links.

MadLad1472d ago

@reals

So only with either company's most recent consoles? The ones most relevant here in 2020?

REALAS1472d ago

@ Ted
I just find it funny that people make it seem like Nintendo has always championed non censorship. They have only relaxed their stance to deliver to their shareholders. Good for them, I guess.

MadLad1471d ago

@reals

What I think you're noticing is people going at Sony, because they have been the censorship kings of this generation.

I've never seen people voicing Nintendo's anti-censorship stance, because they've obviously been bad with that in the past. But we're talking about now, and Sony is the one always seen censoring content nowadays.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1471d ago
Activemessiah1474d ago

Brace yourselves for the incoming bitching about this by journalists.

NecrumOddBoy1473d ago (Edited 1473d ago )

Or more likely: "Best on Switch - 10/10"

QuePasa871473d ago

Hmm I wonder if some retail outlets will refuse to sell it

Kabaneri1473d ago

Every open world sandbox game is Hatred for me.

Show all comments (51)
290°

5 Titles That Critics Hated but Gamers Loved

A look at five games that gamers loved but most critics hated.

Read Full Story >>
8bitdigi.com
iofhua2320d ago

Advent Rising is another good example. It got panned by critics but it has a good story and I enjoyed playing it. The graphics are dated, the enemies all look the same, but it was made in 2005 so what do you expect? I wish they made the sequel so I could finish the story but I think the critics killed it off.

2320d ago Replies(1)
Aaroncls72319d ago

I don't trust critics.
I'd value more the feedback from a random user.

nommers2319d ago

I seldom trust gamers or critics anymore. A lot of times high scores just mean how likely you are to enjoy something from the game, but rarely anything about how much you would enjoy said things, or whether the highly preferred type of qualities in a game you’re looking for are even in it. My initial gut feeling of the premise of a game is usually all I need.

quent2319d ago

Silent Hill: downpour another example

Show all comments (20)
130°

Shock Value Alone Won't Sell Sh*tty Games

Joanna Mueller writes: "Since the 1980's, video game advocates have been arguing for the protection of games as a medium of free speech. Frankly, I consider myself in that camp, but just because a game can push against the boundaries of common decency doesn't mean it should. Especially if the developer is just hoping to ride the wave of pearl clutching controversy to the bank."

Read Full Story >>
newnormative.com
garyanderson2788d ago

Nothing wrong with pushing for controversy, but the game still has to be worthwhile. Lots of games in the 90s showed that.

ShaunCameron2788d ago

Because the novelty will eventually wear off and the audience will eventually wise up.

2788d ago
Cy2788d ago

So what? If there's a market for something then why should anyone care if it gets filled, as long as it's not something illegal? You can dislike so-called "edge lord" games all you want (in fact, you can like or dislike whatever you want, full stop) but even if games like Hatred are just trying to take advantage of anti-SJW backlash to make a quick buck, the fact that they exist at all is important in a culture that's becoming increasingly puritan and censorship orientated. Art is supposed to push the envelope. It's supposed to make you think. And even if all a game makes you do is think about why certain people are so desperate to ban it.

Enigma_20992788d ago

Yeah, it makes me think WTF is this s***?

Skankinruby2788d ago

Sure seems to be working for gta

Show all comments (10)