While mainstream media outlets rally the braindead public against so-called "realistic" videogame violence, one comic book writer has gone in the opposite direction -- criticizing videogames for not being realistic enough with its more barbaric content. However, Landry Walker also notes that perhaps society is not ready for such games.
"I’ve been shot at a couple of times," he explains. "... In each instance, the bullets missed. Lucky me. Because there were no handy first aid packs or carefully planted green herbs lying around waiting. If I had been shot, I expect it would have been amazingly unlike a video game. Assuming the bullet did not inflict irreparable harm to my body, the experience of actually being shot (let’s assume a grazing strike to the shoulder) would have likely done irreparable harm to the cleanliness of my pants.
"... I don’t want any of this out of some overbearing concern that we as a society are allowing ourselves to become numb to the grim realities of blah blah blah. Nope. I want a game that recreates that insane rush of endorphins and adrenaline or whatever it is after hearing a simple bullet crack past your ear. That’s what games should be. So real that I just have to put down the controller for a minute because some part of my lizard brain is shaking in disbelief over the scenario I somehow managed to survive."
There are pros and cons to realism in games, of course. On the one hand a tense, hyper-realistic thrill ride would be potentially amazing. On the other, is real-life murder all that fun? Would it be enjoyable to get shot in the shoulder and then lose the use of your arm? Interesting, certainly, but a good laugh? It would take a lot of work and effort to effectively make that realistic a game. I'm certainly all for somebody attempting it, though.
Video Game Violence: What Do Gamers Really Want? [Elder Geek via GamePolitics]
Jim Sterling serves as reviews editor for Destructoid.com, head of the Podtoid podcast, and produces a number of news stories, original features, one-of-a-kind videos. With his passionate argumentative style, controversial opinions, harsh delivery, and dedication to brutal honesty Sterling is a name that you can't help but recognize.
Likes
PS2, iPod Touch, Silent Hill 2, Metal Gear Solid, Dynasty Warriors 3
Meet the rest of the team
| BBcode help |
| [b]Bold text[/b] |
Bold text |
| [i]Italic text[/i] |
Italic text |
| [url]http://www.dtoid.com/[/url] |
http://www.dtoid.com |
| [url=http://www.dtoid.com/]Web link[/url] |
Web link |
|
| [img]http://www.example.com/robot.jpg[/img] |
 |
Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
45 comments | showing # 1 to 45
|
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
Comments policy
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
5:30 PM on 12.28.2009
| 
Also, dodging bullets(like dodging shit in that Wii balance board game) could add to the intensity.
Too bad most (fat) gamers will fail to dodge the bullets and constantly Game Over.
Also, I agree with Jim.
I think I got a mild case of that when trying to beat some of Super Mario Galaxy's harder levels, of all games. Sure some frustration (and embarrassment) thrown in too. The feeling of elation when the I finally got it was, I wanted to jump up and tell people about it, of course being a man, I repressed those "faggy" feelings.
You know how in that Xbox Indie game Weapon of Choice, where tiem slows down when a bullet is close to you? I think doing that will both accentuate how serious each shot is, but also nag you enough to not want to be shot at by a bunch of bullets. Without some Kojima-esque "if you die, your game breaks" sort of consequences, its going to take more than strict "realism" to convey the emotion he's looking for.
I, however, have been thinking about this since I was 10.
Not to say it couldn't be made really intense.
I've always thought the early Rainbow Six portrayed this well. Even though you have dozens of characters to choose from, you really felt the need to them alive and avoided any moments of charging into a room with guns blazing.
The consequence is something that could be used effectively in a game. With some many FPSs emphasizing on how many kills you make, it would be interesting seeing one that discouraged killing by rewarding you somehow.
Didn't Deus Ex do that, kinda? Yeah, having both of your arms "dead" did nothing but screw up your aim, but enemies with a dead arm dropped their weapons. If you took severe leg damage, you'd move slower and eventually be reduced to crawling, though I've never had it be so bad where I've lost all limb use and been reduced to a torso and head. Of course, you were still alive in that case. If your torso or head hit 0 health, you died. And enemies realistically aimed for these areas in an attempt to put you down, instead of say, death by a thousand cuts to your feet or something.
I mean, that's realistic, right?
http://drgamelove.blogspot.com/2009/06/permanent-death-episode-1-inasupicious.html
I'm with you on the TV part but not the 'no game will EVER match' part I believe you're underestimating the future of technology. It will likely be eventually possible.
indeed, the future technology will surely do things that seems impossible for us right now, i suppose we just need to wait and pray to see it for ourselves
That is all.
A modern soldier's life, at least in a modern military like the US Army or the Australian Army, is, in truth, rather boring. Many soldiers never, ever see a moments bit of action in modern combat, and those that do probably don't see much of it. If, for example, COD:MW2 was realistic, 60% of the game would be spent in travel and preparation, 10% in briefings, 10% in actual combat, another 10% doing the paperwork and going through debriefing and then 10% training.
And Infinite combo is absolutely right - there's no way to do that unless you have someway of creating a full, 360 degree, interactive digital environment and we are so far away from that in terms of technology that you wouldn't believe it.
I mean, again, take COD:MW2 - how fun would that game be if you got killed every time you got shot even ONCE? Not much fun I'd imagine.
True, I've always been a bit disturbed by the ability for the main character to get shot multiple times. For games that are taking place today, there's not much you could do about that. Your character has got to have health and survive in some way.
For games that take place in fantastical or sci-fi settings, I would appreciate it if the designers explained how or why the main character or characters can take so much damage - for instance, maybe they are genetically engineered to regenerate, or maybe they have a magic shield that can resist damage. This would enable the character to have "health" without having magic bullet absorbing properties.
Alternatively, you could just make every main action hero Gumby. He could take a few bullets I bet. Him and that horse of his.
I'm not one of the people that buys into videogames causing people to be violent, but I do think videogames can desensitize people to violence, and I don't think it is any coincidence that many of the school shootings in recent history have been carried out by people who enjoy first person shooters. Again, is this because the videogames cause violence? I think not, but I do think violent people seek out these types of media, and if you are a bit unstable, shooting 1,000 people in a videogame may make it slightly less foreign or bewildering to pull the trigger on 20 classmates. If you increase the realism of the graphic violence depicted in videogames, it blurs the lines between reality and fiction. Just my thoughts.
If anything, it should be the fact that 99% or so of players of violent games that NEVER go out and murder people that should prove, to most sensible people, that violent games do NOT cause people to be violent. Maybe you should be wondering if people bullying those kids caused the comlumbine shootings, and maybe if people had treated them better, it could have been avoided. Videogames probably had nothing to do with it, and was just an outlet for them, as it is for all of us.
and fake violence will NEVER desensitise people to real violence. There's a very real difference, I think most people are smart enough to realise, between videogame and movie violence and real life violence. You are not giving people enough credit to distinguish between the two. If that were the case no one would blink an eye lid when soldiers die in war, or when 9-11 happened or any similar tradgedies.