General Gaming News.

[TheMysteriousGX]

I'm mocking your inability as an adult (cause the game is marketed as an adult-only game based on the rating it has) to be unable to judge ahead of time whether your trauma will prevent you from being able to play the game unharmed to the degree that you need the game to infantilize you and treat you as a child that needs a figure of authority to parent them and judge whether something is too scary or too triggering, when in fact you ought to be able to make that determination for yourself, by yourself.

...that's what the tag is for. How are you supposed to know what situations the game has before you...play the game?

Do you know what scary games do to me? The make me paranoid, I literally jump at shadows. So knowing this about myself, I augment how I experience them so that I can enjoy it without being too scared to go to the bathroom or having to examine my closets afterwards lol. (in my case, playing with friends usually does the trick so I don't get too in my head)

I don't need the game dev to be kind to me and gently let me know I'm gonna be triggered, that's my responsibility to handle, and I feel condescended to by the attempt.

So, you're offended by the devs, in a completely optional, opt in way, let you know you might need some friends to play with before they scare you so bad you can't use the bathroom? Like, so what if the warning is in the game instead of on the probably non-existent box?

I really don't understand why we have to protect people's feelings these days so hard. It's babying people and frankly insulting that we can't trust people to know what they hell they are buying. At the same time they almost need them in the age of snowflakes, because without them SOMEONE would cause a big stink that the horror game had triggering scenes of gore in it.

Frankly if you are an easily triggered individual, then you obvious know that about yourself so you should have some personal responsibility and look into the things you buy for yourself. Like if gore, monsters, graphic violence, whatever are things that upset you...maybe you shouldn't buy the horror game where all of that is listed on the box. It's really dumb and it unminds the idea of people being responsible for their own actions.

It's the same nonsense that Ubisoft has to put in front of Assassin's Creed games that say "This was made by a bunch of people of all races so please don't call us racist based of stereotypical depictions that you might see in the following game about Greek's/italians/etc etc". It's so stupid because it suggests that coorporations KNOW that there is a mob of people who actively look for random shit to be offended by, and by warning people in advance they are also acknowledging that they are afraid of these people. Which is an attitude that severely restricts developer's ability to freely develop their art, stories, and characters because they'll always have to worry about offending someone.

You end up with extremely uncreative junk.

Speaking of having people actively looking for things to be offended by that restricts the developer's ability to freely develop their games...
Like, c'mon: you get that you're offended by literal trigger tags, yeah?

 

[Dreiko]

...that's what the tag is for. How are you supposed to know what situations the game has before you...play the game?


So, you're offended by the devs, in a completely optional, opt in way, let you know you might need some friends to play with before they scare you so bad you can't use the bathroom? Like, so what if the warning is in the game instead of on the probably non-existent box?

Usually you know things like the genre of a game before you get it, and when a game is of the horror genre, and you know you are sensitive, it is incumbent on you to research the game ahead of time to ascertain if you feel comfortable playing it.

And it's not like I can't use the bathroom, I'm just thinking paranoid thoughts as I do, it's just my imagination being over-reactive basically. I get super immersed in games, that's a general thing, it just takes an inconvenient form with horror stuff in particular haha.

I am accustomed to ignoring warnings on a box as random BS they have to put on there to allow for the box to be sat on shelves since you can't freely display R18 stuff on most store shelves and they'd have to put it in a restricted area so no matter the content of the game the box will always be at most something that could pass a pg13 rating either way. A tutorial style popup is a lot more invasive than that and also not necessitated by laws that are in place. And don't get me wrong, if we had a proposal to change those laws so you could put r18 boxes on any shelf I'd support that in a heartbeat.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Speaking of having people actively looking for things to be offended by that restricts the developer's ability to freely develop their games...
Like, c'mon: you get that you're offended by literal trigger tags, yeah?

Im not triggered but you seem to be. Are you triggered by the offense of someone being annoyed by trigger warnings? Should i have included a trigger warning in my rant about trigger warnings?

Also let's think about the actual situation that has to happen here.

You go to the store and see Dead Space on the shelf, the tags on the box specifically say gore, blood, intense situations, with pictures of monsters and a "mature" rating to the game. You KNOW that you are triggered by this stuff but you by the game anyway. You get home, install the game, launch it, see ANOTHER content warning. At this point does anyone shut the game off and rush it back to the store going "nope. Im out."?

That entire concept is extremely wild to me. Games already warn you of their content on the box before you buy it, this warning also exists on the digital stores. I dont really understand why someone's gotta be warned numerous times.

It would be like going to a boxing match and then getting upset that the men are hitting each other.

 

[BrawlMan]

I'm usually indifferent towards trigger warnings, but I do find it odd they place in a Dead Space game. I know they are optional, but still an odd choice for a horror game. By this point, you're either know what you're getting into or not. No excuses. Even fantasy stories can have trigger warnings now in books. A book I've been reading recently has a trigger warning in the preface, before the story starts. Saying that it involves slavery, when that was already established on the back of the book. Your target demographic for this book are people between the ages of 14 and 25, they can handle it.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

What a way to get info out there and reported on!

Nintendo Switch exclusive Sports Story scrubs game development criticism hidden in secret room

Nintendo Switch indie exclusive Sports Story has been updated to remove its criticism of game development, which was hi…

www.eurogamer.net

Alright, alright, you're off the hook! But I will get to the source of this madness one way or another...

As far as Nintendo is concerned, they ain’t off the hook unless they actually follow through on that changed text, for real.

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

The trigger warning argument is the stupidest thing I've seen a while, lol

 

[XsjadoBlaydette]

Solidarity Comrades!

40 staff stage strike at Ubisoft Paris development studio

A group of around 40 Ubisoft staff downed tools to strike last Friday, following calls by unions for workers to take ac…

www.eurogamer.net

Farewell Crimesight. We hardly knew ye.

Konami PVP mystery game Crimesight will shut down after just one year

Konami is calling time on Crimesight, its anime-inspired PC social deduction game that launched last April, blaming "va…

www.eurogamer.net

As far as Nintendo is concerned, they ain’t off the hook unless they actually follow through on that changed text, for real.

Nintendo swung and miss for the big screw up.

Am not entirely certain from the article, but it didn't sound like Nintendo was responsible for any of this from what I can see. Unless I missed something.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Am not entirely certain from the article, but it didn't sound like Nintendo was responsible for any of this from what I can see. Unless I missed something.

Huh….I guess I generally thought anything on a Nintendo system required complete approval from them, including any changes made to content within a game.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Huh….I guess I generally thought anything on a Nintendo system required complete approval from them, including any changes made to content within a game.

Iirc you just need to pass certification, outside of that your game can have almost any content within.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I'll just leave this here.



This was 1999, by the way.

 

[BrawlMan]

I'll just leave this here.

View attachment 7840

This was 1999, by the way.

Resident Evil have them as well (a lot of Capcom PS1 & PS2 survival horror titles as well). Devil May Cry counts, but Dante will usually shoot at the screen, sort of making fun of this.

This is when the medium was still young. Kids or teens got these games themselves, from their parents or an adult that didn't know what they were buying the kids, etc.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Resident Evil have them as well (a lot of Capcom PS1 & PS2 survival horror titles as well). Devil May Cry counts, but Dante will usually shoot at the screen, sort of making fun of this.

Yet at the time nobody got ants in their pants about it. It was actually an unofficial seal of approval that you were going to get the good horror shit.

And even back then there were options to turn down the gore, or make the blood green. Nowadays people get mad at the concept of trigger warnings for no reason. Well, there is a reason, that being... yeah no, I still can't come up with one. I was thinking their reason would be 'don't be a pussy', but then I'd have to come to the conclussion that these people are still in elementary school, which surely couldn't be true. That or fans of Bill Maher.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Resident Evil have them as well (a lot of Capcom PS1 & PS2 survival horror titles as well). Devil May Cry counts, but Dante will usually shoot at the screen, sort of making fun of this.

This is when the medium was still young. Kids or teens got these games themselves, from their parents or an adult that didn't know what they were buying the kids, etc.

And those notices had different intents. The early days were there to notify parents that your kid is playing basically a Rated-R video game so maybe you don't want your child seeing that.

Like you said the medium was young, and aimed at a younger audience, and people didn't understand or think that violence beyond what you'd find in a Mario game was becoming possible.

Notice that movies like Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Halloween, etc did not have these warnings because they had a thing called, being rated R. And people knew that you don't send your kids to a rated R movie.

It's gotten to a point where Disney has placed Trigger warnings over old cartoons because "they are products of their time". Which is funny to me because clearly they feel the content is "offensive" but aren't willing to remove the content because it makes money, so the fix it to warn the triggered and easily offended because The Little Mermaid is too skinny or whatever.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

I'll just leave this here.

View attachment 7840

This was 1999, by the way.

Silent Hill was pretty fucked up for a mainstream release at the time. As for how DS Remake compares, factoring in modern industry norms, etc…who knows. But the underlying question would be what would people say about that SH warning today? *shrugs*

 

[BrawlMan]

Yet at the time nobody got ants in their pants about it. It was actually an unofficial seal of approval that you were going to get the good horror shit.

Exactly. You just sort of answered your own question. It still doesn't change the fact that the medium was young at the time, and that little content warning was nothing more than the parental advisory label. An egotistical boost for kids and teens saying "hey, I just witnessed, listened to or played this product that's meant for adults and grown ups! I am mature enough to handle it!". The reason nobody else complain, because not everybody had internet to complain about it back then. Plus, by the time they would have been able to, they would have long forgotten about it and moved on to something else.

And even back then there were options to turn down the gore, or make the blood green.

If we're talking resident evil, only the N64 version of RE2 allowed the blood color change. But yeah, there are plenty of other horror games that allowed that option. The last game that allowed green blue, or purple blood, was Oneechanbara Bikini Zombie Slayers in 2009. Nowadays the franchise only allows red, black, or white blood. They don't do any of the crazy colors anymore.

It's gotten to a point where Disney has placed Trigger warnings over old cartoons because "they are products of their time". Which is funny to me because clearly they feel the content is "offensive" but aren't willing to remove the content because it makes money, so the fix it to warn the triggered and easily offended because The Little Mermaid is too skinny or whatever.

I'll defend that on some level. I rather they acknowledge history, then try to pretend it doesn't exist or remove it, like they did nothing wrong. Even then, Disney has a habit of locking out some of their older movies from the older times behind a parental lock. Aristocats being a standout example on Disney+. That is still a former hiking that should not be done. WB, even before the digital streaming, had either warnings or celebrity endorsed warnings on their own Looney tunes DVD box sets. I will give them that. They weren't afraid to just come out and say it.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Silent Hill was pretty fucked up for a mainstream release at the time. As for how DS Remake compares, factoring in modern industry norms, etc. Who knows, but the underlying question would be what would people say about that SH warning today? *shrugs*

Well, a bunch of people recently got mad because Pink Floyd's 50th anniversary album had a rainbow on the cover. So it wouldn't really be a surprise if the Silent Hill 2 remake comes out with the warning screen, and it leading to outrage.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Well, a bunch of people recently got mad because Pink Floyd's 50th anniversary album had a rainbow on the cover. So it wouldn't really be a surprise if the Silent Hill 2 remake comes out with the warning screen, and it leading to outrage.

Wait what the fuck did Pink Floyd do?

 

[BrawlMan]

Wait what the fuck did Pink Floyd do?

Rainbow on the cover.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Rainbow on the cover.

This one? From 1972?

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Well, a bunch of people recently got mad because Pink Floyd's 50th anniversary album had a rainbow on the cover. So it wouldn't really be a surprise if the Silent Hill 2 remake comes out with the warning screen, and it leading to outrage.

To that, a big fifty year old Hmmmm...