Comments on: Game Developers are Better Than Everyone Else?

By: Tiago

Tiago — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 03:46:54 +0000

Something about gore, blood and violence in games: In the first 10 minutes its cool, interesting maybe even impressive, but to the end of the game you will not care about it anymore, you just get used to it, so there’s actually no point in adding a complex system of dismemberment to games, it actually doesn’t add sustainable content as the game goes on, you just get bored with time. Just like a new car, one month and you don’t like it that much.

Thats should be the reason why most of the new multiplayer games are using unlocks for guns and gadgets, it adds to the game something that will make you play more.

By: Chad Stewart

Chad Stewart — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:07:29 +0000

I think Al hit it on the head here. I don’t think it was the idea of designing a kill. I think it was the idea that the promotion of the game is to get people thinking about creative methods of murder. This is what will be associated with the game.

Also, I bet somewhere someone would be outraged at the “write a gruesome description of a brutal murder” contest. :p

By: Al King

Al King — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 15:22:25 +0000

It’s got to do with the PR campaign being juvenile, and nothing to do with moral outrage. That game developers have to consider death animations does not make them their highest aspiration.
The Dead Space series is by all accounts solid, atmospheric horror. The promotion, meanwhile, puts the focus on the pure spectacle of violence, which is just boorish. Brandon calls it /regressive/, not evil. He, like you, “just [doesn’t] think it adds much”, and so when it is made the centre of a high profile campaign it makes the industry look like a bunch of mouthbreathers. Nowhere did he suggest censorship.
It’s just a fact that the actions of a few can lead the whole industry to be tarred with the same brush, and EA has just been totally tasteless recently (see the Dante’s Inferno “Sin to Win” contest as well).