Assuming this game was supposed to be a time sink ( A every "edgy" time sink) then from what I've seen it accomplishes that. I wouldn't go out of my way to buy it but...eh
Poll: Does Hatred actually look like a good game?
- Thread starter EmperorZinyak
- Start date
It looks a competent enough twin stick shooter I guess, hard to tell as those games are as much about "feel" as anything else. Its not something I would buy unless I'm bored and its £2 on Steam though, controversy or not its not a genre I'm all that interested in and the only other twin stick shooter I have bought in many years (Halo: Spartan Assault) was under the same circumstances.
I enjoy games as a story telling medium, I know nothing about Hatred's story and a game with violence for violence sake is not something I'd be into.
Did you even read what I wrote? I did say this was a way for me to pass time. So by definition it's a waste of time.Mutant1988 said:
As for if I have any personal investment on this. Yes I do. This is for my enjoyment.
I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm just trying to understand your view on the subject. And I still only get "boohoo too bad cry me a river" and not an explanation. But I guess it's okay if you don't want to answer.
There is nothing to discuss about the merits of the game because it isn't out yet. Like, that's impossible. We have to wait untill it's out and play it. How can you say something has no merit when it doesn't even exist yet? Trailer exists yeah and you can say stuff about it but as for the whole game? Not possible. And even if you think the trailer sucks there is no reason to attack those who do like it.
And what should I get over? This conversation? Like I said this is for my own enjoyment. I don't see a reason to "get over it".
The developers made this to create controversy - I think that's a really juvenile thing to do.SquallTheBlade said:
The game itself doesn't look good - So why are people interested? People seem to be interested in the concept, but that seems to be it. The game itself seems secondary to the "concept": Take mediocre game, staple on "controversial content" and voila - Marketing success. It looks just like a run of the mill isometric shooter in lazy monochrome (I find that aesthetically unpleasing) that would be completely ignored, had it not been for the "controversy" (Well played, you manipulative PR exec).
As for the concept, well, liking the concept of this game tells me that you're the kind of person that enjoys rubbing your entertainment in the face of those that find it disturbing or objectionable.
The one that's willing to champion the "It's just a game" defence, to feel good about themselves for their games not being censored. Which it shouldn't be, won't be, but I'm still going to call it shit, because it looks like it. Want to rally against censorship? Pick a game that doesn't look terrible.
As for me not wanting you to like or buy it, that's motivated solely by self interest. If it doesn't sell, we see less garbage like this. Or better efforts, whichever. Maybe we get another Postal, which tempered it's anti-social themes with satire. That would be nice, because Postal 2 was an awful game. Or I just played it too late after it's release. The gameplay feels incredibly dated.
tl;dr - The game looks mediocre. The concept is terrible without a good game. The people interested in it seemingly are so only for the concept, which as previously stated was just tacked on to a terrible looking game to create controversy in the name of profit, selling it to all the juvenile morons who gets off on it existing uncensored and wanting to rub it in the face of whoever.
As for the defence that it's interesting from a moral point of view... Do you know what misanthropy means? There's not a whole lot of nuance to hating absolutely everyone (So the main character is 100% unsympathetic) and the reason for doing so is usually mental illness. So yay, we'll likely get an even greater stigmatization of mental unhealth because of this dreck, how fun. That or just an absurd representation of it, like usual - Video games sure love those hallucinations.
That's my reasoning, take it or leave it.
Get over the fact that I don't like people that like garbage. Your appeal to civility or understanding is both trite and forced and comes across as thoroughly condescending.SquallTheBlade said:
No problem whatsoever with the game existing/being made/being on steam/being marketed/etc...
But!
It isn't, at all, what I'd consider to be 'in my wheelhouse.' Just not interested in ruthlessly slaughtering stuff that, for the most part, doesn't fight back, be it of screaming fleshy NPCs or anything else really.
But!
It isn't, at all, what I'd consider to be 'in my wheelhouse.' Just not interested in ruthlessly slaughtering stuff that, for the most part, doesn't fight back, be it of screaming fleshy NPCs or anything else really.
Protagonist could go and maybe a little more color. If they went for a Sin City like look it could work but need a better protag. Hey wasn't Mad World also monochrome?Mutant1988 said:
And as for destructive environments, eh I'm a sucker for it. A love born out of XCOM and Red Fraction(early game). I liked being able to destroy cover or make new entrances on my own.
Look man, I agree with your sentiments that the game is overall trash, but this right here is getting into some really mean and unnecessary insults here.Mutant1988 said:
I mean, come on now. Are we really going to go the route of "If X person likes this game then they are mentally impaired."?
Don't. For one it's a really shitty thing to say to anyone. And secondly your really skirting the CoC on the Escapist.
Well, if I was forced to play an "isometric mass murder rampage game", I'd play the first Postal. Not only did it provide more challenge (since some targets fired back with grenades and rocket launchers, not just the pea-shooters the cops in Hatred use), AND it DECONSTRUCTED gratuitous violence at the end. Basically, the Postal character has a total mental breakdown after committing his rampage, and when he comes to, he's locked up in an insane asylum while the doctors tut-tut at how yet another demented madman thought his murderous crusade was noble and just.
That's right, one of the most notorious games in history actually went out of its way to DECONSTRUCT the violence it was infamous for. Hell, look at the ending yourself if you don't believe me:
And if people claim that Hatred isn't "supposed" to deconstruct violence, and is only supposed to be "fun" (the developers have sure gone out of their way to do so), it sure as hell fails to look anything like "fun". It's not colorful, there's nothing actually funny about killing the civilians (compared to GTA or Saints Row, where the panic lines really ARE hilarious gems for how over-the-top they are), the only gameplay shown only features fleeing civilians or pathetically armed cops, and the protagonist is an utterly unlikable Nihilist, who doesn't even have the "evil is cool" charisma that makes other fictional mass murderers somewhat more charming. He kind of does resemble actual mass murderers in that sense - he seems so shocking when he opens fire on a bunch of innocent people for no reason, and turns a normal day into one of terror for a few hours, but when you peel back how much of his "motivation" is just rambling, misanthropic nonsense, he only becomes a disgustingly pathetic waste of flesh that you feel shouldn't have been born in the first place.
That's right, one of the most notorious games in history actually went out of its way to DECONSTRUCT the violence it was infamous for. Hell, look at the ending yourself if you don't believe me:
And if people claim that Hatred isn't "supposed" to deconstruct violence, and is only supposed to be "fun" (the developers have sure gone out of their way to do so), it sure as hell fails to look anything like "fun". It's not colorful, there's nothing actually funny about killing the civilians (compared to GTA or Saints Row, where the panic lines really ARE hilarious gems for how over-the-top they are), the only gameplay shown only features fleeing civilians or pathetically armed cops, and the protagonist is an utterly unlikable Nihilist, who doesn't even have the "evil is cool" charisma that makes other fictional mass murderers somewhat more charming. He kind of does resemble actual mass murderers in that sense - he seems so shocking when he opens fire on a bunch of innocent people for no reason, and turns a normal day into one of terror for a few hours, but when you peel back how much of his "motivation" is just rambling, misanthropic nonsense, he only becomes a disgustingly pathetic waste of flesh that you feel shouldn't have been born in the first place.
If you don't find the game appealing that's fine, but there is really no reason to be little the people who do is really unnecessary.Mutant1988 said:
"Deep" meaning isn't hard to fabricate, when the game is release I'm sure someone somewhere would find reason in the slaughter.MaddKossack115 said:
Even then its pretty clear this game's main purpose is to make statement, other than that its pretty much just an over the top edgy shoot'em up, and there's nothing really wrong with that. Some people get a rush from fleeing screaming victims, I know I do from time to time, so its not impossible for someone to find this entertaining if not fun.
In short it's just an edgy game for edgy people.
Or so they would like to believe.Islandbuffilo said:
I didn't know "edgy" was synonymous with "Attention seeking" (Purposefully invoking controversy to generate sales) or "Self-important" (Defying "Censorship" and "PC" attitudes) though.
I suppose you learn something new every day.
Uh... the actual developers have repeated time and again that Hatred has NO statement to make, outside of the broadest strokes of a "take that" to "politically correct" games. And their idea of doing so is just making a game where you kill people with no context whatsoever. That isn't even remotely close to making a statement, and it sure doesn't look entertaining in the slightest - certainly not when there are SCORES of other games that either make rampaging genuinely hilarious or exciting (GTA, Saints Row, Postal 2), or takes some serious time to deconstruct how violence is in a realistic setting (Manhunt, Spec Ops: The Line, Postal 1).Islandbuffilo said:
"Some people get a rush from fleeing screaming victims"
Well, ok I guess, but I really think that a game should have MORE going for it than just shooting fleeing innocents in the back - either by providing more challenge (heavier enemy units, not just the cops armed with pea-shooter pistols), making it legitimately funny and over the top (actual comedy, a Laughably Evil protagonist, SOMETHING to make the game less grim), or to go out of its way to highlight why indiscriminate violence is bad in real life (as in, if you're going grim, DO IT RIGHT, NUMBNUTS!!!). Otherwise, it's a one-trick pony at best, and with a measly 7 levels, it would only last about a rental before anybody morbidly curious enough to check Hatred out just gets bored with what flimsy premise it presents.
"In short it's just an edgy game for edgy people."
...Sooooo, in short, the target audience is 90s Kid?
...YEAAAAAH, that is NOT a demographic to build a successful franchise on the in the 21st Century - and frankly, it wasn't that much of a demographic back in the 90s either (even though SOME idiots in the comic, movie, and game industries still think otherwise).
It's often synonymous with attention seeking and more coincidentally paired with self important.Mutant1988 said:
That would indeed be a statement. I'm not going to go deep into it, because as I said earlier, its not hard to find "deep" motives and meaning in things and I certainly won't be doing that for this game. I will say this; It's simply violent for the sake off being offensive, simple as that.MaddKossack115 said:
MaddKossack115 said:
A lot of what you're asking is contradicting what the developers want this game to be, doing grim "right" doesn't mean having some half-assed philosophical connotations of morality.
