Over the summer, I realized something about myself, and in turn found out something about mankind!
(Because anything I do is so important, I assume all of humanity follows suit...). I was merely enjoying a harmless session of Mario Galaxy 2
when I found myself getting all 120 stars and beating the final Bowser battle a second time. I got to the part where you must walk up to and grab the final Grand Star or whatever. Except for cuckoos and Piantas who deserve severe punishment for the fact they attack me and yell at me, respectively
I've played free-roam games where you can kill/hurt people. GTA
gave a risk-reward system. Harvest Moon Magical Melody
justified my hate for characters through its design as a social-situation-simulator-lite. And yet, I found in these games that I became bored with carrying out actions of ill-will more quickly than in those games where hurting people had no place in the design or gameplay of the game, i.e. Mario
games and etc.
I only found the aspect of hurting these people appealing in theory, but became a bit disappointed when put into practice. With this revelation, I close with the statement that it is only human nature to want to rebel against authority, and since a game designer basically creates the laws of the game, we want to go against the design of the game.This entails that a game can never leave us as consumers truly, completely happy and satisfied. We will always seek to push the limits of what we are allowed to do in vain.
So with this analysis, I've found the answer to why I find stomping Little Girl #3
or punching Morbidly Obese Pineapple Thing #17
so appealing over shooting a Nazi.
The answer is: Who Cares!? Amirite?!
LOOK WHO CAME: