Hatred and the Catharsis of Violence
- Thread starter Shamus Young
- Start date
Have you seen how some players attack friendly NPCs and allies to see how the game handles it? Are they immune to your attacks? Do they just flinch and complain but never die? Do they retaliate and hurt you or try to kill you? Do you lose instantly? I wonder what would happen if I played Hatred without shooting or attacking anyone.
Didn't we have this debate already over Super Columbine Massacre RPG?
Honestly this game sounds kind of interesting to me. It sounds like it's deliberately going out of it's way to make you feel uncomfortable playing the protagonist. The point made in this article about feeling no catharsis because we're not killing people 'who deserve it' seems to be exactly what this game is shooting for. It would sound ludicrous to suggest that violence in movies should only be directed towards bad or evil characters, wouldn't it?
I've seen comparisons between this game and Penderecki's 'Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima' around the net, and I think the comparison is valid, in that they are works of art not meant to be 'enjoyed', but creating more negative emotions in the audience instead.
Honestly this game sounds kind of interesting to me. It sounds like it's deliberately going out of it's way to make you feel uncomfortable playing the protagonist. The point made in this article about feeling no catharsis because we're not killing people 'who deserve it' seems to be exactly what this game is shooting for. It would sound ludicrous to suggest that violence in movies should only be directed towards bad or evil characters, wouldn't it?
I've seen comparisons between this game and Penderecki's 'Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima' around the net, and I think the comparison is valid, in that they are works of art not meant to be 'enjoyed', but creating more negative emotions in the audience instead.
I really liked the level headed approach to this article and I agree with the idea. My only complaint is I want to know what he thinks about Postal's comparison to Hatred. Postal 2 and Postal are not the same thing, Postal 2 tried to be some form of satire, you get attacked by human caricatures of annoying people like he mentions, but Postal 1 was a completely different beast. Postal 1 was almost exactly like Hatred (or at least what we all assume Hatred is going to be). You spawn in, you shoot people who are minding their own business, they scream and beg, can be executed, and there is no attempt to characterize or make us sympathize with the protagonist. The only real difference between Postal and Hatred (aside from graphical) is that Postal did offer the ability to not kill "innocent" people, you would progress by killing a certain percentage of the hostile enemies who seemed to be reactionary and merely trying to stop your rampage, and it takes an insane amount of effort to actually beat the game without harming any non-combatants.
I would like to see Shamus examine Postal 1, but I really enjoyed his analysis of other games that Hatred keeps getting compared to because he was very effective at explaining why those comparison's don't stand up. Additionally, as someone who wants to see what Hatred is as a game, I am glad he didn't attempt to sway influence one way or the other about it's existence.
I would like to see Shamus examine Postal 1, but I really enjoyed his analysis of other games that Hatred keeps getting compared to because he was very effective at explaining why those comparison's don't stand up. Additionally, as someone who wants to see what Hatred is as a game, I am glad he didn't attempt to sway influence one way or the other about it's existence.
Hmm. Interesting take.
I certainly feel what Shamus says about, effectively, catharsis. I had a really bad week a few years ago where I was in a head-on traffic accident (the other driver's fault entirely), and then got rear-ended on the way to the courthouse to file the accident report. For a while there, playing something like Saints Row and pushing cars out of the way before taking a short cut onto the sidewalk and down an unpaved hill gave me a genuine feeling of relief.
As far as Hatred goes, I'm less inclined to cite something like GTA as a comparison than, say, Carmageddon. Mowing down shrieking innocents for points, sometimes as the goal. The style is more cartoonish, and the individual deaths go by in seconds, but I think there's some parallel there, at least to the point where I'd hesitate to say that something like Hatred has never been done before.
Of course, Hatred clearly takes its time to, erm, "savor" the murder of its victims, and I can't blame anyone for finding that disturbing. As for me, I might have to actually play the thing before I feel I can render judgement.
I certainly feel what Shamus says about, effectively, catharsis. I had a really bad week a few years ago where I was in a head-on traffic accident (the other driver's fault entirely), and then got rear-ended on the way to the courthouse to file the accident report. For a while there, playing something like Saints Row and pushing cars out of the way before taking a short cut onto the sidewalk and down an unpaved hill gave me a genuine feeling of relief.
As far as Hatred goes, I'm less inclined to cite something like GTA as a comparison than, say, Carmageddon. Mowing down shrieking innocents for points, sometimes as the goal. The style is more cartoonish, and the individual deaths go by in seconds, but I think there's some parallel there, at least to the point where I'd hesitate to say that something like Hatred has never been done before.
Of course, Hatred clearly takes its time to, erm, "savor" the murder of its victims, and I can't blame anyone for finding that disturbing. As for me, I might have to actually play the thing before I feel I can render judgement.
As stated before Hatred isn't new, its just a clone of the original Postal games.
Hatred isn't any more violent or morally questionable then any game where you go on a murder spree. In most games you commit mass murder. Even Mario commits an insane amount of violence, what exactly did the Koopa people do to deserve receiving 1000s of deadly curb stomps and having their ruler tossed into a vat of lava? Kidnapping...?
By writing articles on Hatred, you play into the exact game the developers are trying to drum up. The best thing you can do for Hatred is to talk about it all.
Hatred isn't new, isn't interesting, isn't worth talking about, isn't wrong, isn't anything. Its just another game on Steam, of which there are many more interesting starving creative works that need more attention. And most of those works you also commit mass murder.
Hatred isn't any more violent or morally questionable then any game where you go on a murder spree. In most games you commit mass murder. Even Mario commits an insane amount of violence, what exactly did the Koopa people do to deserve receiving 1000s of deadly curb stomps and having their ruler tossed into a vat of lava? Kidnapping...?
By writing articles on Hatred, you play into the exact game the developers are trying to drum up. The best thing you can do for Hatred is to talk about it all.
Hatred isn't new, isn't interesting, isn't worth talking about, isn't wrong, isn't anything. Its just another game on Steam, of which there are many more interesting starving creative works that need more attention. And most of those works you also commit mass murder.
I know you didn't mean to quote Fight Club, and I'm not mentioning that other than to find it kind of funny but my real response is thus:martyrdrebel27 said:
I've never honestly felt that way about life. I need to pay rent, keep utilities running, food on the table, clothes on my back and gas in the car. Maintenance on the car too. Those are things I need in this modern age to survive, and also to provide for my family. I've never felt those things as "shit I don't need". Thats a very narrow view of people to have of people you don't even know. You don't know their motivations, why they get out of bed every morning and go to work, braving the hellish commutes and such. So how can you even attribute that ideal to a whole? Its a stereotype of people, and its kinda wrong to look at them that way.
I mean you may totally be right about some people being shallow assholes who drive shit they can't afford to jobs they hate and pay for shit they don't need, but right alongside that yapping assjack on his iphone doing 80mph weaving through traffic in a BMW SUV yelling to his secretary about how he doesn't need this job but shows up anyway may be a guy who drives a modest Honda Civic who has a sick wife at home who can't work, deals with personal issues on a scale most people wouldn't understand, a 15 year old daughter who just started high school and just happens to be beautiful so that makes him worry all the more about her safety and security while he's doing his best to make ends meet on a daily basis, and sometimes going without so his family can get what they need.
You don't know who may be sitting next to you at any given time, whether they be serial killer, serious jackass, a Neil DeGrasse Tyson or just a regular guy who gave up his dreams to raise a family and struggle mightily against a system that doesn't care about ANY of those people.
I've met a few people in life who are as you described but they were few and far between the people I've met that are good hardworking and honest decent folk, from all levels be they poor, rich or somewhere in the middle.
Its not good when you start viewing other people through that type of lens.
Hatred doesn't strike me as anything particularly new.
It's another game, playing off the "Too Hot for Stores" and conflates its value through its controversy. By using the surface of "being banned", it's instead generated much more pre-orders and sales and free advertisement just by its content alone.
But the thing is, you don't need a game to be controversial or uber-violent or gratuitous for the sake of gratuity to make it good. I've played plenty of games where the player character doesn't so much as throw a punch that was still as engaging. Now, does that mean violence or gratuity are indicators that a game is bad? Of course not. But that doesn't mean it's guaranteed Hatred's going to be the next Ocarina of Time.
At the end of the day, it's the quality of the content that matters. I've seen pieces of art with the most positive messages but with terrible executions. I've seen pieces of art with deplorable messages but well executed storytelling. There's a difference between South Park and Brickleberry.
?It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.? -Roger Ebert.
It's another game, playing off the "Too Hot for Stores" and conflates its value through its controversy. By using the surface of "being banned", it's instead generated much more pre-orders and sales and free advertisement just by its content alone.
But the thing is, you don't need a game to be controversial or uber-violent or gratuitous for the sake of gratuity to make it good. I've played plenty of games where the player character doesn't so much as throw a punch that was still as engaging. Now, does that mean violence or gratuity are indicators that a game is bad? Of course not. But that doesn't mean it's guaranteed Hatred's going to be the next Ocarina of Time.
At the end of the day, it's the quality of the content that matters. I've seen pieces of art with the most positive messages but with terrible executions. I've seen pieces of art with deplorable messages but well executed storytelling. There's a difference between South Park and Brickleberry.
?It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.? -Roger Ebert.