Do you think developers should tone down the violence in video games?

No.

If anything, they need to up the violence/gore.

Video games are tame as it is. They aren’t realistic enough. I am actually kinda bummed out they aren’t pushing harder.

I have been BEGGING Rockstar since 2004 too allow kids/babies in GTA. My dream is to drive a car at 200km/h and then hit a baby stroller and watch the baby go flying in the air.

Or how about running full speed and football kicking a kid off a building and watch as his body goes flying into traffic?

I don’t care how offended any of you get. It’s a video game and I want to do things in them I never would in real life. :P

^ lol

Hm, well this is a tough one. On the one hand, I'm open the the possibility that violent games could inspire real-life violence to some extent. But one has to ask if there was no violence in games - could they even exist at all? The same goes for tv series, movies and books... - how could we create entertainment that has no violent content?

I think it depends more on the context of the game and the violence in it. I really don’t have any issues with the violence going on in games like Resident Evil, Mortal Kombat, Devil May Cry, or even Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty. However games like Hatred or ones that let you play the shooter going around and shooting up a school or something are just way too much and totally tasteless and unnecessary. I don’t want a GTA game that lets run over baby strollers or kids, that just seems wrong. Thankfully that kind of stuff is typically frowned upon by most and rightfully so.

@thereal25: we have the same games in europe but dont have the mass shooting the U.S. has...... it is nothing to do with games.

Up the violence. I wanna strangle a guy with his own intestines.... in a videogame ofcourse.

Yes and no. Yes for the sake of not every game needs to be hyper-violent to be "fun". No for the sake of video games are factually and scientifically unrelated to real-world violent outbursts, and in no way should an artistic vision be limited because of a bunch of white supremacist fascists not wanting to give up their assault weapons unless they can prove they are sane.

Hell no!!!!! I want Manhunt 3 in VR

It does come across as hypocritical that we had all these left gaming journalists and Resetera mob banging on about titties and sex in video games.

But shooting people in the face? Gotta protect that shit.

Overall, no. Most developers seem to have a handle on how much violence works for each game. The days of gore being used to sell a mediocre product for the most part are behind us. There are a few games out there that I personally would enjoy more if they toned things down, but I'm just getting old.

@ajstyles: have you looked for mods?

Is this the moment when Trumptinos are going to start crying about violence in videogames because their masters say so? That's just hilarious!

Short answer, NO.

The good news is that most developers have grown up and don't rely on raw violence to make a good game.

no, just like any form of art or entertainment, movies, music, paintings, zines, it can be as tame as you want and as over the top as you want. Its freedom of expression, personally i like over the top entertainment so i would not like for peoples ideas to be watered down or censored. But hey there's a market for family friendly stuff as well, let people make what ever the hell they want and if you don't personally like it, just don't partake in it.

Yeah, like Game of Thrones and Walking Dead didn't had any extreme violence in their shows.

Like that scene in GoT where someone kills a horse. After that scene, I haven't heard anybody going around killing horses because it showed a horse dying in the show.

Or that one scene in TWD, where that one black got captured and leg got cut off by a group of cannibals. Didn't hear or see any stories of newly brainwashed cannibals attacking random people.

No the mass shootings and whatever will happen anyway, the people who perpetrate them will find any reason to do it, it's not Film, TV, Trump, Talk Back Radio/TV, just as much as it wasn't/isn't Metal Music and supposed satanic backwards or subliminal messages causing it ... or Elvis, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Doors, The Sex Pistols or whomever "corrupting: the youth.

As long as I've been alive I've heard of something being to blame.

I love how video games are blamed when even TV is worse... also, has anyone cracked a book open anytime recently? It's a wonder some of these authors aren't brought in for severe psychiatric evaluations.

Just have a variety of games. It's the same thing with all these 'controversial' aspects of games.

Considering all the data on gaming and violence, it seems like there is zero reason for concern. There is not even correlation between violent games and crimes, let alone causation. And what is pervy sex going to do? The most harmful thing it could do is that it might lower birth rates. Our phones are already making everyone socially awkward so I wouldn't worry too much about that aspect.

And considering we're starting to find out that 'representation' in media never has a positive effect on the people they try to represent no matter how realistic or positive its messaging, I wouldn't be too concerned about that aspect either.

All-in-all I think we should all relax and let most things exist without worry. Like I just established, it is more a matter of taste than anything else. If there is a renewed interest in more diverse games (in thought, in politics, in characters, in cultures, in gameplay, in levels of violence) then that is fantastic.

But I don't think we have to condemn developers individually (or fans) because their game/character is too this or that according to our tastes, or for their game not being diverse enough. We can bring it to attention that we're open to play other types of games and if there is a market for it, we will see more of those games. (In terms of violence I think we have an extensive palette of games.) I think the carrot works better than the stick if you want to get a point across.

The worst thing that can happen (like with Kingdom Come) is people beating down developers/games that are bringing more diversity, for not bringing the 'right' kind of diversity. Or for developers to change an established character or franchise just to be less controversial. You build up a fanbase only to tell them what they enjoy is wrong? Instead, make something new then, but don't make your fans look bad.

It's OK if someone wants only this specific thing in a game. Like a specific level of violence or a specific level of realism in the characters. But don't forget that there are millions of other gamers on this planet who may have other tastes than you, or other interests. So then it's not likely that your very specific tastes will be catered to.

If you want to live in a world that is more free and more diverse - to surround yourself with diversity - it will ask of you to be more tolerant towards other ideas/other ways/other people. If you cannot tolerate others, then you cannot handle diversity. This is a lesson that the internet still has to learn.

@uninspiredcup: It's the next thing though. First they'll replace every woman in video games by attrocious hellspawns. Next they'll replace all the guns in videogames by walkie-talkies.

I think video games without violence will become so boring. I think we should not reduce violence from video games nor we should increase it. It can be dangerous to have brutal violence in our video games. But video games without any action are going to be boring enough.

I think there's a difference between violence and brutal unnecessary violence. There needs to be a medium in my opinion.

I think a game can be as violent as they developers want, and have whatever age restriction is suitable for the violence.

Games haven't become as gory as I expected. The results of shooting someone in a modern shooting game is hardly any different from games 15-20 years ago. Many games don't even have blood decals/texturing, just a puff of red mist and that's it.

Microsoft Parenting Simulator. Xbox Launch title. Not a bad idea.

It all just depends on the content of the game itself and adding so much violence doesn't matter to me. I feel like most of developers are getting alot of pressure just because one man said video games is bad but we had this study done already, playing violence gaming doesn't make you go violent outside and all this is just a scapegoat cause the media doesn't want you hear the real truth.

I think games should have violence but no stuff like Postal 2.

I don't say that violent games don't have an impact on The Society. I say we need to live with the problems created. Video games are important for the health of our Society.

If the game is good I don't care what's in it or what it is about. It's that simple.

That being said, if devs are using excessive violence just to be different and cover up bad or repetitive gameplay then it's a problem. Many have tried that route and they didn't get very far.

Agreed. I think the main issue is gun control. I really think America needs to make drastic changes in this department. In a society where at least one in ten people are mentally unstable and/or psychopathic, the idea of anyone over the age of 18 being able to walk into a store and purchase a hand gun or assault weapon is just ludicrous.

As for games, I do think that certain games are inappropriate for children and maybe even young teens. Otherwise their developing minds might get the idea that so much senseless violence is normal.

I want way more violence. The lack of gore in even M-rated games is very disappointing and completely unrealistic.

Nope, more sex and violence are welcome to more video games.

It really depends in what context we're talking about violence in games. I am not a fan of gratuitous gore like in Mortal Kombat and (I know that may just be me) cannot for the life of me understand how anyone can be into that. I don't want violence to go away, it is a part of life and makes sense that it would be portrayed even in games.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that violence in games is absolutely fine and violence comes in so many different "flavors". I will just never like explicit gore that is put in there just for the sake of shock-value.

Violent video games (and movies, and TV, and music, and books, and art) can certainly attract inherently violent people, but they won't turn a normal person violent. We need to be able to recognize who these people are beforehand, and get them whatever help they need (and keep them away from guns). Most shooters aren't all that surprising in hindsight.

I was about 9 when the original Mortal Kombat released, and I didn't have any heightened desire to rip people's heads off or tear their hearts out. Over the top violence for the sake of it tends to be more dumb/comical than anything.

I tend to lean towards fun over violence in games so I would say less violence. The shock value of crazy gore ended in the early 2000’s and I want good gameplay over violence any day. My least favorite part of the Uncharted series is the ridiculous waves of people you have to kill in 3rd person. Turns Drake into Rambo and it doesn’t feel right. I would’ve appreciated some other types of gameplay over this.

@uninspiredcup said:

It does come across as hypocritical that we had all these left gaming journalists and Resetera mob banging on about titties and sex in video games.

But shooting people in the face? Gotta protect that shit.

It's not the left that is protesting violent video games, you fucking twat.

Good job reading.

@clone01 said:

@uninspiredcup said:

It does come across as hypocritical that we had all these left gaming journalists and Resetera mob banging on about titties and sex in video games.

But shooting people in the face? Gotta protect that shit.

It's not the left that is protesting violent video games, you fucking twat.

??

You'd think making ultra violent games for the crazies would prevent violent acts because they are playing the games instead.

They should make Manhunt VR for all the serial killers out there.

Make online versions of those games and put all the people that are really f'ed up on watchlists. Like if someone in manhunt VR really likes stalking women stabbing them and strangling them with their own intestines for multiple hours a day that might not be normal.

Nobody has gone on killing spree with video game case, cartridge, or disc. Walmart does not want to display violent video games in their stores, but you can walk across the aisle and buy one of the fire arms on display.

Don’t really care?

Violence doesn’t somehow hold intrinsic value. It’s complimentary to the goal of the developer. If violence helps achieve the goal of a game’s design, then.....ok? Won’t bother me. If it doesn’t, then it doesn’t.

Video games are inherently more violent than other entertainment media. The very foundation of video games is violence. R-rated movie blockbusters are uncommon, yet M-rated video game blockbusters are very common. Since video games are more violent than other media, it only makes sense that video games face the most backlash over violence. So no, it's not "unfair" that games get targeted the most over violence. They get targeted precisely because video games are the most violent entertainment medium.

Mods or meds? Lol.

This.

I put no but it really doesn't matter to me either way.

One of the biggest flaws of those trying to force 'diversity' is just assuming everyone has equal and compatible views and the diversity they want is really just sexuality or skin deep and not diversity of ideas. They only want diversity in the most positive and mary sue like forms. The Last Of Us 2 Paris games week trailer backlash for the "violence against women" is a prime example of this as they only wanted women in privileged/special positions in video games and not equal positions to that of men.

Cyberpunk 2020's description of how 'diversity' created division with every group trying to make themselves special instead of equal and calling those that had what they didn't 'racist', 'sexist', 'elitist' and etc is prophetic.

yes they should.

No, censorship leads to more censorship.

If violent video games were to have a drastic impact on the minds of children then it would have been a widespread problem 20 years ago.

Parents are the ones responsible for allowing their kids to play age-restricted games.

No.

Doesn't matter to me too much, but...

I prefer realism over gratuitous gore or censorship. In a game, if I shoot someone in the head with a .22 I don't expect to see giblets. If I shoot them with a slightly bigger round, I expect to see pink mist and maybe some blood on the wall from the exit wound. If I shoot them with a .50 round or larger, I expect their head to explode.

Honestly I am OK with violence because at least that can be done to convey a point, it's more specifically gore that I don't really like. Gore is violence's more primitive other half, and while they often go hand in hand, too much gore with little violence just comes off fake, crude, and childish.

With that said, I am having a really nice time watching zealots get eaten alive by rats in A Plague Tale. That's a combination of gore and violence that I can enjoy. Really great game btw.

Yeah the whole equality through inequality, tipping the scales, is bullshit to me.

There are issues with society in terms of treatment of certain types of people pertaining to race, gender, and so forth, but the goal should not be to keep the pendulum swinging towards one side or the other; the goal should be to get it to stop swinging entirely.

I live in a progressive part of the country (SF Bay Area, Northern California) and I'd say that I know quite a few gay people and a handful of trans people. With that said, they don't walk around making it a point to get that information out there into your face, so if I play a game where there are a disproportionate amount of a same-sex people, I'm thinking A.) what's the agenda here, and B.) boy this is really unrealistic, what an immersion killer.

Honestly you don't know most gay people are gay until you get to know them and you ask what they're doing for the weekend and they go "Well my boyfriend/husband and I are going to watch the football game" and then my internal response is "Wow I didn't even know he was gay!", and then my follow up response is "Well, why would I, he is just a normal dude that digs other dudes".

I guess I've never played the "controversial" games, because I don't really think about it. Sometimes there's stuff like the sexy scenes in the old God of War games that I guess I've always thought was unnecessary or even embarassing due to the obvious immaturity involved. If you are playing FPS there's a ton of shooting violence, but I think of it more as an over the top action movie. It's rather cartoon like. I think it's a huge stretch to even suggest a game like Call of Duty or Counter Strike causes violence, though there are deranged people and degenerates that play those games. It is not the game that causes their issues. You can basically make the same argument for games that you can for guns, deranged people shouldn't violent games anymore than they should have access to guns. I guess if they have both, that can be a dangerous combination but it's the gun that allows them to kill.

I have watched a few movies that were just purely stupid violence, like so much violence the movie actually bored me. Reading about that movie "The Hunt" it just sounded like a stupid idea from the start, much like the Purge. I'm not for "censorship" per se, not by the govt, but I have no idea how trash like that gets green-lit by studios.