Hatred

Post Reply New Topic

Can't be that much different than GTA in controversy. I mean, sure this might be worse, but in GTA you ARE a criminal. You rob mini marts, mug people, sleep with prostitues, etc. The whole point of GTA is to rob people. Yeah, it has a story, but...it's a criminal story. I think GTA gets it's controversy watered down due to the comic nature of most of it. Like, who would take Trevor Philips serious?

I'm fine with being evil in InFamous Second Son and killing everyone as they moan, scream and implore me to spare them

I like this little counter-analysis in how it analyzes the content of hatred.

And this remains one of the reasons why I hate the whole thing.

At least with GTA there's more to it than "just kill everyone".

But this? When looked at from a pure gameplay standpoint, it's an *EXTREMELY* generic top-down shooter. As in, about as generic as it gets. I say this as someone who has played the shooter genre absolutely to freaking death (and no, I dont mean FPS included in there). It just never stops giving me the impression that the devs are using controversy SPECIFICALLY to cover up their lack of design skills. To cover up that, really, the game just isnt all that interesting from a gameplay standpoint.

Even something like Mortal Kombat does this to an extent. Now, granted, MKX turned out pretty darn good, gameplay-wise, but then that series is also downright ANCIENT. It's had about a bazillion years for the devs to grow it. Looking back on the original games, gameplay-wise, they really were very, very generic (hell, characters all had pretty much exactly the same normals in the original game!). Theoretically, this game here could grow into that, but for now.... yeah. I just see nothing here of value. Just devs with a lack of design talent.


.... on the note of Extra Credits, keep in mind the context: they are meant to be ENTIRELY about the study of JUST game-design, in that series of videos they do. When they start to head away from that (which I think they did in that video) it's best not to take them too seriously. They're good at mechanic analysis, but dont exactly specialize in much else.

I've played and admired that title, it's about the dichotomy of good and evil, within each individual. Quite a constructive thing to learn about, really. We're discussing games developed by people sufficiently weak minded to give into evil and cross their fingers whilst letting their heads spin praying to nothing it makes them some money. You're also fourteen, or at least human to be sure. It's clinically proven that playing the villains, peculiarly enough can only strengthen your moral core, something I'm sure you posses considering your choice of forum.

To quote the developers;

"1. People think we're some f-ing noobs who are making crappy game just for the sake of controversy. No, most of us are considered as "seniors" in the industry and we know the stuff.

2. Who the [Explicit] ever told that in Hatred you just go and shoot people until you're getting killed... Some ret*d journalists are writing this [BS] again and again instead of doing some research first. We've told many times it's not that way, we have objectives, level progression etc, it would be dumb and boring in the way they describe it."

I did confirm earlier that most of them were quite experienced in the industry and the engine they are using. While this doesn't mean they can't horribly screw up. I think that they have enough experience to realize that they can't be extremely generic or else lose all credibility. But just as what I've seen and heard of their actual work, I don't think the game will be bad. The soundtrack is already brilliant. Some of my favorite works used controversy as a great tool and asset - it's the surrealist way. I don't expect it to be a smashing hit or incredibly innovative, but I expect something at least 3.5 stars from them.

Cop out. Saying "we're industry seniors" just means these bratty devs have not only managed to create one of the most vile PC games in living memory, it means their work environment is probably even worse. They probably had to find the meanest damn venture capitalists on the planet too. That or they invested countless thousands of dollars out of pocket in order to have make-believe murder-suicides because they just suck to high heaven. They are f'ing noobs, because their noobosity quotient is too stratospherically high for them to think of anything better to do.

Now can we PLEASE quit feeding trolls?

Meaningless.

You can be an industry vet for 20 years...

...and still be capable only of absolute trash.

As I said before: If these guys have the skill to make something good, they should just PROVE IT.... by making a game that can stand on it's own BY JUST BEING A GOOD GAME instead of standing by holding onto a crutch made of "controversy". No matter what they end up doing with the game past this point, they've already chosen the second option, and I for one wont be even considering a game that they've so much as looked at too hard (I have the same view of a dev like Rockstar).

I can live with all the games based on killing, since they have existed since the beginning.

This is what I really hate about gaming besides the obsession with graphics.



There are tons of food now made explicitly for hardcore gamers, which you must eat to be taken seriously while not eating casual food(real food).

It's true that they can still produce crap, I said that. But how is controversy a crutch? Is Shock Buddhism a crutch? Is surrealism nothing but crutches? How does using one relate to the other? They don't. That is my point. Surreal became a well known word thanks to the incredibly controversial The Corpse which was specifically designed to be incredibly controversial. Controversy is at the heart of surrealism. Hatred is likely surrealist based on the fact that it is dealing with mass shooting (the purest act of surrealism.) Would an art philosophy that relishes in a controversy be incapable of creating that which is great via it's own definitions by use of the controversy? No.

It's a crutch because they're basically saying: "I dont actually know how to go about this whole design thing very well, but... WAIT JUST A MINUTE. I've got it! I can cover up my lack of ability by surrounding it with as much chaos as possible! If there's enough of it, nobody will NOTICE the problem until they've already handed in the money! Or they'll end up buying it even with that just to spite others! And I'll get a recognized name even WITH a total lack of talent! I IS TEH GENIUS!!1!!"

And really, there's a difference between "surreal" and "bloody stupid". If they want to create a surreal experience... there's about 20 bazillionty millionty games out there that already know how to do this that they could learn from. It's been done before. It's been done REALLY WELL before. ***OFTEN***. Instead: "SHOOT ALL TEH DUDES: ITS SO OFFENSIVE!! !!1". All they did was take an idea (the gameplay's core mechanics) that's downright ANCIENT at this point, and put a coat of controversial on it.... nothing more. And I mean *literally* nothing more, because that's exactly what they did. The game is Robotron but with "Look how offensive this is!! ! Woo! Controversy! Yell about it so that people know what it is! Buy it out of spite!". And without Robotron's creative enemy designs (again, "shoot teh dudes" is the best they could do here; and yes, I'm going to keep saying "teh").

And honestly, if there was more to it than this, if it was deeper than this.... the developer wouldnt be running around saying things like "Hehehe... that's right! That's right! Bring on the haters and the trolls, everyone, tell us how much you hate us! GIGGLE!", which is something they've actually gone and done. That's not a sign of depth or good design. Thats a sign of someone using bad business practices. I mean, really, TROLLING as a business practice. Yeah. That shows real depth of skill, design, and creativity. I'm sorry, but no. It shows a dev that either A: didnt care to begin with, and just wants to create a vortex of chaos to suck in as much cash as possible, or B: has little true skill, yet must make the game stand out and requires a strong effect that has nothing to do with game design in order to produce it.

I really frankly dont give a flying fart about what the theme of the game is at this point. It's the nasty business practices and the stupidity that it's causing that bothers me, and the fact that what these guys are doing is practically spitting in the face of everything good about game design while at the same time trolling the hell outta everyone. Other devs have certainly done this too (and I hate them also), but never to this extent. And even worse, this is just EVEN MORE AMMO for all of those obnoxious twerps that are always rambling on like broken records about how games cause murder and turn kids into psychos and ZOMG my dishwasher broke down CLEARLY BECAUSE OF VIDEO GAMES!! ! Havent we all had enough of that idiocy? Frankly, for that bit alone, they need a good kick where it counts. They should know better. It's like watching a rather unintelligent toddler throw food at a wall directly after their parents admonished them about it.


That's all I'll say for now though about it; if I think of more I'll respond again later on, but for now I've said all I wanted to on the subject.






....what in the world?

....Yeah, I've got nothing for that one. I dont think another facedesk gif would quite do here.

Note to self, dont eat that.

A huge market has developed over the past 10 years that makes food for the hardcore gamers among other things.

LOL

This game is probably supposed to look tough but it really just looks emo.

Agreed

The creators of Hatred should have just made a sequel to Shadow the Hedgehog.

Where's that DAMN fourth chaos emerald?