While I know you are well intentioned, you have reached an level of casual ineptitude that makes listening this podcast further uninteresting.
The comments about the developers of 'Hatred' are absurd -- particularly from people working around game-journalism who should know that developers of controversial games can still be talented people and that making a game with a reasonable level of visual consistency and quality and tone and creativity is not something that just happens.
Some people want to play games in which they can be the "hero", defeating virtual monsters, because in their real life they are powerless. Others want to play simulators of spaceships, because they are never going to be able to go into space. People play dating sims and crime-action games and war-action games, because they allow them to play out fantasy situations that they don't really want to have in real life. 'Hatred' seems like it's about letting people play out a fantasy of killing. And... so? What's the problem?
Would you say that people who watch 'Natural Born Killers' are looking to become serial killers? Would you say that the people who made that film were serial killers? Of course not. The film shows a great deal of cruel and wanton violence, even from the "good guy" characters -- but we understand that someone can enjoy the film without wanting, in any way whatsoever, to act violently.
Games, books, films... these things portray events that are not real events. A game about killing innocent people isn't the same as killing innocent people. And different people would have different reasons for playing such a game. Some people who are anti-social might be attracted to 'Hatred', much like the 9-11 terrorists were attracted to flight simulators; but we don't blame the flight simulators for terrorism and there is no reason to blame a game for the actions of people who play it.
If you are not able to separate fantasy from reality -- if you cannot, as a minimal baseline, start with the premise that "anything" is fit material for a film, book, video game or the like, then you shouldn't be in a position of providing critical commentary on any of those things.
When I play a game like Skyrim, I don't steal. Because I simply don't want to. The game includes "crime simulation" as well as "murder simulation" -- permitting and even glorifying assassination or mere random killing of people and wild animals. Lots and lots of people play the game that way. But I don't hear you complaining about that.
If you want to be professionals, you need to go beyond your "This game/film makes me feel all icky!" whining and examine your emotions, your point of view, your background and determine if this material is even something you're in a position to clearly evaluate. And if you want to talk about it, you need to address what about the material is affecting you and why. Why would you think killing peasants in Skyrim is fine, but killing people in Hatred is not.
We _all_ object to being killed in real life. No one is advocating having "haters" walking up and down the streets killing people. But you seem to be conflating "a game" with "reality", and speaking like your objections to the game are as obvious and reasonable as objections to actually being shot.
Look, here's a game for you to consider: Any number of players may play. On your turn, roll a 6-sided die. For the results 1-5, nothing happens. If you roll a 6, you wipe out all life in the universe and the game ends.
Would you play that game? Why not? Because it's silly? Not challenging? What about the detail that it involves killing not just billions of humans, but potentially vast numbers of aliens on distant worlds? Hmm? You see, I don't get the impression that your objection to 'Hatred' is anything other than mindless, convenient posturing. Perhaps it isn't; but you're not giving any impression of thoughtfulness. Because you seem to object more to the idea of someone "really hating people" than of someone "playing a game in which fictional people get killed". And it's just a game, it's not going to make anyone really hate anyone or really kill anyone, any more than my stupid dice-throwing game will end all life in the universe.
The same ineptitude holds for your opinions on Sony and 'The Interview'. You (yes, collectively; both of you) are free to just mindlessly ramble in your podcast, but you seem to be talking about these subjects as if you never gave them any serious thought at all. I know you're not really journalists, and it would be unreasonable to expect you to bother to find out anything about computer security, but you are speaking like fools.
Your dismissive comments about the government of the DPRK are inexcusable. They are a real country in the real world and have numerous effects upon real people outside their borders. They are not laughable or inept. They have maintained hereditary power and kept their borders intact for decades despite extreme economic sanctions. They have developed nuclear weapons -- and while they might not have the ability to launch missiles to hit every square inch of the US, they could choose to kill quite a few people if they wanted to. And you think a film mocking their leader would somehow unravel all of that?
You seem to think that people are so malleable that a game like Hatred will turn them into killers. And a entire society is so fragile that a comedic film in a foreign language will overthrow their government.
It's been kinda nice listening to your little rants about Transformers, because listening to people speak with passion about subjects they are familiar with is always fascinating. But you speak too much of late with inflated authority about things you just don't know anything about, and that's just repugnant and tiresome.
Good luck with your show.