So, chopping dudes heads off...

  • 92 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by Lord_Xp (602 posts) -

A side note to this is there is an option in the beginning of this game to turn off the graphic content before you start the main story.

I like this game because of how realistic it could be in the situation of "what if?" This just shows how realistic war can get.

#52 Posted by PeasantAbuse (5138 posts) -

If you punch people with that shock melee thing sometimes they vomit everywhere, it's nassssty.

#53 Posted by BlatantNinja23 (930 posts) -

I don't see any difference between cutting a dudes head off and just shooting them

#54 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3309 posts) -

To be fair to the OP, there is always a difference between extreme violence and extreme violence in any real setting. Context yo. Also saying But Y game is morally decrepit isn't really a good counter argument, it's a concession.

Watching the BO2 Quick Look, I was a little, uh, weirded out, by the scene with the 2000 Angolans who are all the same model just being mowed down or having their heads chopped off.

#55 Posted by xSeanZx (190 posts) -

@Redbullet685 said:

Because cutting off the heads of bad guys is awesome.

This. Stop being such sissies jesus christ.

#56 Posted by AgnosticJesus (544 posts) -

The story in BLOPS 2 is just god awful. The gameplay is fun at times but I had a hard time taking the story seriously after the level where you play as Mendez going all "Jon Rambo" on the Nicaraugan army yelling Josephina the whole time. It was completely stupid and her image popping up on the screen just made it worse. I know that not many buy COD for SP but this campaign sets the bar for the series even lower. I've seen many threads here saying the SP story in Halo 4 is awful. BLOPS 2 makes it look like The Godfather of video game storylines in comparison.

#57 Posted by geirr (2563 posts) -

Oh crap, violence in a video game? O nooooo.

#58 Posted by YOU_DIED (703 posts) -

@Giantstalker said:

Because if you're really willing to kill someone in a life or death situation, as presumably the protagonist is, it doesn't matter how they die.

Sometimes, the machete lands in their chest. Other times, it hits the neck.

Presumably, Treyarch wanted to communicate that this character is willing to do things in a brutal way because they have no empathy whatsoever for their enemy. Which is - at least on paper - an ideal quality for a soldier.

Reminds me of this:

#59 Posted by ThunderSlash (1720 posts) -

Rock, Paper, Shotgun's review of the game has a pretty grotesque screen shot involving a dude and the lack of knees. It looks cool, but it's still grotesque.

#60 Edited by studnoth1n (222 posts) -

@xSeanZx: gratuitous violence is one thing, but these people are not your garden variety "bad guys," but actual people from an actual event during the angolan civil wars. furthermore, did you come to the conclusion that the people whose heads you're chopping off are in fact bad guys simply because of what the game "suggested"?

#61 Posted by xSeanZx (190 posts) -

It's a video game. Bottom line.

If you cant come to the realization that violence like this happens IN REAL LIFE everyday, then there is something wrong. And when you come to this realization, and still complain about violence in a video game, then you are just focusing on the wrong issues.

#62 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3309 posts) -

@studnoth1n: You're operating at way too high a level duder. Look above and below you. Here's this thread summarized:

  • Cutting off bad guys heads is sweet and if you don't like it you're a pussy
  • This violence happens in real life and if you can't understand that you're a pussy
  • If you are focusing on violence in games and not in real life you are a pussy
  • If you don't like gore you're a pussy (did I mention it's a video game, pussy?)
  • Video Game = Violence Inside Desensitized Electronic Ovals (Gore And Mutilation Exclusive) [Pussy]
  • Only pussies are affected by context: decapacitating Angolans and ripping the wings off a griffin is the same thing
  • If any other medium has any other similar violence then this violence is fine, you know, unless you're a pussy

Pff. And people says gamers are all desensitized white 14 years-olds.

#63 Edited by studnoth1n (222 posts) -

@xSeanZx: it's a pity that so many of you missed the point entirely. once again, the issue isn't censorship or the graphic violence, but rather the mischaracterization of public figures and events. i would think that most people who care even the slightest for intellectual honesty and historical accuracy would find black ops portrayal of such events a little more than disconcerting. the fact that it's a video game makes it no less irresponsible.

#64 Edited by GetEveryone (4455 posts) -

@GERALTITUDE said:

@studnoth1n: You're operating at way too high a level duder. Look above and below you. Here's this thread summarized:

  • Cutting off bad guys heads is sweet and if you don't like it you're a pussy
  • This violence happens in real life and if you can't understand that you're a pussy
  • If you are focusing on violence in games and not in real life you are a pussy
  • If you don't like gore you're a pussy (did I mention it's a video game, pussy?)
  • Video Game = Violence Inside Desensitized Electronic Ovals (Gore And Mutilation Exclusive) [Pussy]
  • Only pussies are affected by context: decapacitating Angolans and ripping the wings off a griffin is the same thing
  • If any other medium has any other similar violence then this violence is fine, you know, unless you're a pussy

Pff. And people says gamers are all desensitized white 14 years-olds.

Yeah, seeing the reactions in this thread has made me realise I'm probably beyond the whole videogame scene at this point.

I mean, I love games, but I just can't reconcile my world view with the majority of the comments here (and this seems fairly representative of the 'gamers' who frequent these forums).

That isn't to say there aren't upstanding people here, just that they are in the minority.

#65 Posted by punkxblaze (2985 posts) -

Hotline Miami has made everyone an armchair philosopher about violence in video games.

#66 Posted by cikame (1000 posts) -

Treyarch have had increased gore in their CoD's before now, i do prefer game series to have some thematic consistency but this doesn't really bother me, if it had chainsaw bayonets then i might be bothered.

#67 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3309 posts) -

@GetEveryone: I normally try and steer clear, but the reactions on this topic were really just too funny (as in, too sad). Basically anyone who finds any violence offensive/anyone who even thinks about violence is, again, a pussy. It boggles my mind that so many gamers can't see how important context is to violence.

I wish it was the "scene," but, unfortunately, I believe this topic is not only representative of the gamers who frequent this forum, but just people in general.

On that note, word up.

#68 Posted by believer258 (11897 posts) -

@GetEveryone said:

@GERALTITUDE said:

@studnoth1n: You're operating at way too high a level duder. Look above and below you. Here's this thread summarized:

  • Cutting off bad guys heads is sweet and if you don't like it you're a pussy
  • This violence happens in real life and if you can't understand that you're a pussy
  • If you are focusing on violence in games and not in real life you are a pussy
  • If you don't like gore you're a pussy (did I mention it's a video game, pussy?)
  • Video Game = Violence Inside Desensitized Electronic Ovals (Gore And Mutilation Exclusive) [Pussy]
  • Only pussies are affected by context: decapacitating Angolans and ripping the wings off a griffin is the same thing
  • If any other medium has any other similar violence then this violence is fine, you know, unless you're a pussy

Pff. And people says gamers are all desensitized white 14 years-olds.

Yeah, seeing the reactions in this thread has made me realise I'm probably beyond the whole videogame scene at this point.

I mean, I love games, but I just can't reconcile my world view with the majority of the comments here (and this seems fairly representative of the 'gamers' who frequent these forums).

That isn't to say there aren't upstanding people here, just that they are in the minority.

I didn't say anything about anyone being a pussy. All I've said is that I don't, personally, see an issue with it. I can separate actual world events from what's happening in a game. You're telling me that excludes me from being "upstanding"?

#69 Edited by living4theday258 (679 posts) -

you chop zombie heads off too........

@Giantstalker said:

Because if you're really willing to kill someone in a life or death situation, as presumably the protagonist is, it doesn't matter how they die.

Sometimes, the machete lands in their chest. Other times, it hits the neck.

Presumably, Treyarch wanted to communicate that this character is willing to do things in a brutal way because they have no empathy whatsoever for their enemy. Which is - at least on paper - an ideal quality for a soldier.

SPOILER WARNING: Click here to reveal hidden content.

the funny thing is when you chop tons of dudes heads off your playing as Raul Menendez an untrained terrorist not a soldier
Online
#70 Posted by GetEveryone (4455 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@GetEveryone said:

@GERALTITUDE said:

@studnoth1n: You're operating at way too high a level duder. Look above and below you. Here's this thread summarized:

  • Cutting off bad guys heads is sweet and if you don't like it you're a pussy
  • This violence happens in real life and if you can't understand that you're a pussy
  • If you are focusing on violence in games and not in real life you are a pussy
  • If you don't like gore you're a pussy (did I mention it's a video game, pussy?)
  • Video Game = Violence Inside Desensitized Electronic Ovals (Gore And Mutilation Exclusive) [Pussy]
  • Only pussies are affected by context: decapacitating Angolans and ripping the wings off a griffin is the same thing
  • If any other medium has any other similar violence then this violence is fine, you know, unless you're a pussy

Pff. And people says gamers are all desensitized white 14 years-olds.

Yeah, seeing the reactions in this thread has made me realise I'm probably beyond the whole videogame scene at this point.

I mean, I love games, but I just can't reconcile my world view with the majority of the comments here (and this seems fairly representative of the 'gamers' who frequent these forums).

That isn't to say there aren't upstanding people here, just that they are in the minority.

I didn't say anything about anyone being a pussy. All I've said is that I don't, personally, see an issue with it. I can separate actual world events from what's happening in a game. You're telling me that excludes me from being "upstanding"?

Nobody quoted you, and the ones that were had a certain quality about them.

...and I think you've misquoted me. I said I couldn't reconcile my world view with the comments, not the game.

Regardless of that, though, running around with a machete lopping the heads off Nicaraguans is pretty fucking tasteless, and I have a hard time these days figuring out why anyone would want a part of it, 'entertainment' or not.

#71 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3309 posts) -

@believer258: That list doesn't speak for 100% of posters.

#72 Posted by EpicSteve (6487 posts) -

Cause it's cool.

#73 Posted by MiniPato (2737 posts) -

So I just beat the game and at no point did I behead anyone. Was I missing something here?

#74 Posted by MiniPato (2737 posts) -

@rebgav said:

@MiniPato said:

So I just beat the game and at no point did I behead anyone. Was I missing something here?

Yeah, you can only behead with the machete and you have to be the correct distance from the target. I think you can only do it in the first flashback mission and the part where you play as young Menendez, I don't remember being able to get a machete after that level.

I had a machete, but I guess I could never trigger the animation.

#75 Posted by iGooner7 (136 posts) -

Atleast thats a new thing in CoD. Cause we havent seen anything new in the recent CoD's

#76 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4351 posts) -

I'm more bothered by how easy the game makes it look to cut a dude's head off. No way cutting off a human head in real life would be that simple....not that I know from experience.

#77 Posted by believer258 (11897 posts) -

@GetEveryone said:

@believer258 said:

@GetEveryone said:

@GERALTITUDE said:

@studnoth1n: You're operating at way too high a level duder. Look above and below you. Here's this thread summarized:

  • Cutting off bad guys heads is sweet and if you don't like it you're a pussy
  • This violence happens in real life and if you can't understand that you're a pussy
  • If you are focusing on violence in games and not in real life you are a pussy
  • If you don't like gore you're a pussy (did I mention it's a video game, pussy?)
  • Video Game = Violence Inside Desensitized Electronic Ovals (Gore And Mutilation Exclusive) [Pussy]
  • Only pussies are affected by context: decapacitating Angolans and ripping the wings off a griffin is the same thing
  • If any other medium has any other similar violence then this violence is fine, you know, unless you're a pussy

Pff. And people says gamers are all desensitized white 14 years-olds.

Yeah, seeing the reactions in this thread has made me realise I'm probably beyond the whole videogame scene at this point.

I mean, I love games, but I just can't reconcile my world view with the majority of the comments here (and this seems fairly representative of the 'gamers' who frequent these forums).

That isn't to say there aren't upstanding people here, just that they are in the minority.

I didn't say anything about anyone being a pussy. All I've said is that I don't, personally, see an issue with it. I can separate actual world events from what's happening in a game. You're telling me that excludes me from being "upstanding"?

Nobody quoted you, and the ones that were had a certain quality about them.

...and I think you've misquoted me. I said I couldn't reconcile my world view with the comments, not the game.

Regardless of that, though, running around with a machete lopping the heads off Nicaraguans is pretty fucking tasteless, and I have a hard time these days figuring out why anyone would want a part of it, 'entertainment' or not.

I didn't misquote you, my comment was aimed at both of you and both of you seemed to include anyone that thought this wasn't a problem, especially since Geraltitude's list included a parody of something I had said earlier.

Anyway, it might be tasteless but that doesn't necessarily mean that its inclusion in the game is something that should raise a moral eyebrow. At the end of the day, though, if you're not comfortable with it (and there's nothing wrong with that) then don't play the game. After killing an umpteen amount of Nazi's in World War 2 shooters and shooting the limbs and heads off of guys in my recent playthrough of FEAR, not to mention gibbing them in slow motion, I'm just not bothered by gore in games.

#78 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3309 posts) -

You're such a post detective but I feel you never really read what I wrote. Context is everything. My position has nothing to do with blood/gore/decapitation/murder/death. I have no problem with any of those things when they are in their place. I just reviewed Hotline Miami, on the site, Five outta Five.

Do you really think killing Nazis in a WW2 game is the same as decapitating Angolans (the only level in the game where you can decapitate people I think) in a modern shooter? It's frustrating to watch people jump to defend violence in games because they believe it is an attack on the medium or a genre they enjoy. They always, always fail to miss the point. If the entire game involved decapitations left right and center this conversation might not even be happening. But seriously, break down all the stereotypes in that level - and look at how few models of the Angolans there are - the whole thing just smacks of a jock version of Last King of Scotland.

FINALLY: one more thing, and not a rant but a real question, Believer - how far does your policy of "If you're not comfortable with it, don't play it" go. This statement gets thrown around often on the boards and the implication is that anything goes. Where does the line get drawn if not here? How flagrant does the offence have to be?

#79 Posted by Freshbandito (686 posts) -

@GERALTITUDE: I fail to see the context you buried so deeply in your sarcasm and overuse of the word 'pussy'

You can't just take some posts and use them to decry an entire thread's responses then backtrack when called out and say you only meant your rough approximation of wit to be indicative of some of the posts. The deeper conversation about violence in videogames that the topic creator wants is being hamstrung by his focusing on one particular instance of brutality in a game predominantly, if not wholly, based around firing pieces of lead through the human body. He ignores the fact you gun down hundreds if not thousands, as do alot of the people here who think that anyone opposing their viewpoint is just a desensitized violence apologist.

The deep discussion of videogame violence that some people may want to self fellate their sense of intellect through by pretending they're adressing can't ignore "killing nazis in a WW2 game" whilst simultaneously rounding on an instance of "decapitating Angolans" because it's all symptomatic of the same issue. And if the arguments of those who think it's not a big problem are ill thought out and not intellectually valid enough then where does that leave your little sarcastic sattire of their points that refuses to adress the logic behind each thought and instead attempts to group all opposing arguments in an infantile spoof of what you believe to be their stance?

If people want to have a grown up discussion about videogames and the greater themes behind them then they all need to act like grown ups first and stop claiming the opposing argument is wrong and has no justification based purely on the fact that they don't agree with it.

#80 Posted by PeasantAbuse (5138 posts) -

@GERALTITUDE: There are several levels where you can get a machete and decapitate people.

#81 Edited by believer258 (11897 posts) -

@GERALTITUDE said:

You're such a post detective but I feel you never really read what I wrote. Context is everything. My position has nothing to do with blood/gore/decapitation/murder/death. I have no problem with any of those things when they are in their place. I just reviewed Hotline Miami, on the site, Five outta Five.

Do you really think killing Nazis in a WW2 game is the same as decapitating Angolans (the only level in the game where you can decapitate people I think) in a modern shooter? It's frustrating to watch people jump to defend violence in games because they believe it is an attack on the medium or a genre they enjoy. They always, always fail to miss the point. If the entire game involved decapitations left right and center this conversation might not even be happening. But seriously, break down all the stereotypes in that level - and look at how few models of the Angolans there are - the whole thing just smacks of a jock version of Last King of Scotland.

FINALLY: one more thing, and not a rant but a real question, Believer - how far does your policy of "If you're not comfortable with it, don't play it" go. This statement gets thrown around often on the boards and the implication is that anything goes. Where does the line get drawn if not here? How flagrant does the offence have to be?

I read it. I understand what you're saying - that the context of the scene is very important when determining whether it's OK or not.

As for my policy of "if you're not comfortable with it, don't play it", it does have a limit. There are certain things that really are offensive - this, for instance, or Custer's Revenge, or some other things. I just haven't seen anything in Black Ops 2 that crosses that line.

EDIT: All right. Well, fuck. My own link got me to think about this more. I don't like admitting I'm wrong but the same reasons I disliked The Cartel are the same ones I'm arguing against here... nevermind. Still, Black Ops 2 isn't anywhere near as bad as The Cartel.

#82 Posted by SpudBug (633 posts) -

I thought it was downright silly to think that swinging a machete that quickly and indiscriminately would just cause dudes heads to pop off left and right. Kind of broke that first mission for me - I was kind of getting into the CoD2 style charge into battle - then DECAPITATIONS

#83 Posted by SexyToad (2760 posts) -

I won't call someone who doesn't like doing this a pussy or something else. I know some people don't like that much gore (they probably shouldn't have bought a CoD game) But I don't think it's extreme. I believe there's a gore iption, right? So you could possibly turn it off anyways, if not, there should be a gore limiter.

#84 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3309 posts) -

  • "I fail to see the context you buried so deeply in your sarcasm and overuse of the word 'pussy'"

Hm. That may be because you read the wrong post. Read my first and third post, not the list, definitely no context talk in there. I believe the first post literally read: Yo, context.

  • "You can't just take some posts and use them to decry an entire thread's responses then backtrack when called out and say you only meant your rough approximation of wit to be indicative of some of the posts."

Ooh, snuck in a real zinger there didntcha? In fact I can do whatever I want with your posts. Did I backtrack? I felt it was important to say not all of the posters in this forum were being dumb asses, even the ones who weren't "on my side" when Believer spoke up. This is pretty funny to me, my next list will be appended by **not indicative of 100% of posts.

  • "The deeper conversation about violence in videogames that the topic creator wants is being hamstrung by his focusing on one particular instance of brutality in a game predominantly, if not wholly, based around firing pieces of lead through the human body. He ignores the fact you gun down hundreds if not thousands, as do alot of the people here who think that anyone opposing their viewpoint is just a desensitized violence apologist."

This doesn't make really make sense. What are you saying exactly? He can't mention specific instances of violence? He has to talk about all the violence in the whole game at once? How exactly does that work? The OP felt this particular mission was worth talking about. You're saying it's not on the grounds that the game is back-to-front violence? You have to explain this, as currently what you're saying is: This game is violent through out so no one scene is reproachable.

  • "The deep discussion of videogame violence that some people may want to self fellate their sense of intellect through by pretending they're adressing can't ignore "killing nazis in a WW2 game" whilst simultaneously rounding on an instance of "decapitating Angolans" because it's all symptomatic of the same issue."

Nah, that's incorrect. Nazis are cartoon characters left right and centre in nearly every X they appear in these days (looking at you, mecha-Hitler). If you want to talk about that depiction and everything that's fucked up about it, fine, I'm down for that. In this case I could have used a more appropriate example, like "killing Promethean Knights in Halo 4 is not the same as etc" but I was replying to Believer, who originally used that example, and I felt it made sense to use it.

  • And if the arguments of those who think it's not a big problem are ill thought out and not intellectually valid enough then where does that leave your little sarcastic sattire of their points that refuses to adress the logic behind each thought and instead attempts to group all opposing arguments in an infantile spoof of what you believe to be their stance?

That list, or whatever, is not attempting to do any of those things. Myself and another forum poster were bonding over the frustration of the attitudes in this forum. Why would I bother breaking down the logical problems of statements like "It's a game F U"?

  • If people want to have a grown up discussion about videogames and the greater themes behind them then they all need to act like grown ups first and stop claiming the opposing argument is wrong and has no justification based purely on the fact that they don't agree with it.

Freshbandito, where did you go wrong?

The biggest problem with your post is that you break your own word. You say people need to act grown up to have this conversation. But what did you do exactly? What is your post other than an obvious attempt to sound smart while trying to point out everything that was wrong with my posts? Why do you try to belittle me so much if you're so grown up? Take a look at your self duder. You don't come off smart with posts like that, but smarmy. If you wan't credibility, act mature. No one believes you want to be grown up when half your post is jabs and shit like "na na fellate themselves".

#85 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3309 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@GERALTITUDE said:

You're such a post detective but I feel you never really read what I wrote. Context is everything. My position has nothing to do with blood/gore/decapitation/murder/death. I have no problem with any of those things when they are in their place. I just reviewed Hotline Miami, on the site, Five outta Five.

Do you really think killing Nazis in a WW2 game is the same as decapitating Angolans (the only level in the game where you can decapitate people I think) in a modern shooter? It's frustrating to watch people jump to defend violence in games because they believe it is an attack on the medium or a genre they enjoy. They always, always fail to miss the point. If the entire game involved decapitations left right and center this conversation might not even be happening. But seriously, break down all the stereotypes in that level - and look at how few models of the Angolans there are - the whole thing just smacks of a jock version of Last King of Scotland.

FINALLY: one more thing, and not a rant but a real question, Believer - how far does your policy of "If you're not comfortable with it, don't play it" go. This statement gets thrown around often on the boards and the implication is that anything goes. Where does the line get drawn if not here? How flagrant does the offence have to be?

I read it. I understand what you're saying - that the context of the scene is very important when determining whether it's OK or not.

As for my policy of "if you're not comfortable with it, don't play it", it does have a limit. There are certain things that really are offensive - this, for instance, or Custer's Revenge, or some other things. I just haven't seen anything in Black Ops 2 that crosses that line.

EDIT: All right. Well, fuck. My own link got me to think about this more. I don't like admitting I'm wrong but the same reasons I disliked The Cartel are the same ones I'm arguing against here... nevermind. Still, Black Ops 2 isn't anywhere near as bad as The Cartel.

Haha. Ok, have to say: Believer, I am a fan. Someone on an internet forum said "I may be wrong"? You must have balls the size of Volkswagens (or boobs, I guess if you're a lady - that's the equivalent right?). I'm just watching this video for the first time, so thanks for the link. I think it really hits the nail on the head. I agree that fuck yeah, The Cartel is much worse than BO2, but this video does a great job of showing how these problems can accumulate, and also how these problems are generated not because the developers are immoral bastards, but just not really thinking about how all the parts fit together.

Everyone posting on this topic should watch that video.

#86 Posted by jillsandwich (762 posts) -

I guess I'm just not very well-informed on the history of Angola, so I don't really know the context of this war, but cutting heads off of dudes is fine by me. I don't know, I just don't really mind it.

#87 Posted by Freshbandito (686 posts) -

@GERALTITUDE: You clearly are someone with a superiority complex who reads everyone elses posts as though it is a game of one upsmanship that you must take part in and turn into some bizarre attempt at dissecting posts, attempting to go on and explain my post to you will probably only result in further childish 'mentoring' and more displays of how intelligent you believe yourself to be. Nevertheless here we go:

  • "I fail to see the context you buried so deeply in your sarcasm and overuse of the word 'pussy'"

Hm. That may be because you read the wrong post. Read my first and third post, not the list, definitely no context talk in there. I believe the first post literally read: Yo, context.

My post was directed solely at your 'opinion = pussy' post and was a jab at how you lost all pretext to arguing context in favour of over-simplifying other posts. Your first and third posts I have no issue with.

  • "You can't just take some posts and use them to decry an entire thread's responses then backtrack when called out and say you only meant your rough approximation of wit to be indicative of some of the posts."

Ooh, snuck in a real zinger there didntcha? In fact I can do whatever I want with your posts.

Clearly, and that is to the detriment of your argument in the post to which I replied.

  • "The deeper conversation about violence in videogames that the topic creator wants is being hamstrung by his focusing on one particular instance of brutality in a game predominantly, if not wholly, based around firing pieces of lead through the human body. He ignores the fact you gun down hundreds if not thousands, as do alot of the people here who think that anyone opposing their viewpoint is just a desensitized violence apologist."

This doesn't make really make sense. What are you saying exactly? He can't mention specific instances of violence? He has to talk about all the violence in the whole game at once? How exactly does that work? The OP felt this particular mission was worth talking about. You're saying it's not on the grounds that the game is back-to-front violence? You have to explain this, as currently what you're saying is: This game is violent through out so no one scene is reproachable.

What I was saying here is perfectly well expained towards the end of the quote. You yourself disregarded the argument brought up that the games in this series feature killing nazis in world war 2 which is a part of this argument, it's a history of these games and shouldn't be ignored when discussing the game's approach to the topic of violence.

  • "The deep discussion of videogame violence that some people may want to self fellate their sense of intellect through by pretending they're adressing can't ignore "killing nazis in a WW2 game" whilst simultaneously rounding on an instance of "decapitating Angolans" because it's all symptomatic of the same issue."

Nah, that's incorrect. Nazis are cartoon characters left right and centre in nearly every X they appear in these days (looking at you, mecha-Hitler). If you want to talk about that depiction and everything that's fucked up about it, fine, I'm down for that. In this case I could have used a more appropriate example, like "killing Promethean Knights in Halo 4 is not the same as etc" but I was replying to Believer, who originally used that example, and I felt it made sense to use it.

Nazi depictions in games being accurate or not is besides the point, they intend to portray nazis, a part of history and real people, Ideology and timeframe don't change the fact that it's all the killing of other human beings and people will rally against some instances whilst ignoring others because "Oh that's different"

  • And if the arguments of those who think it's not a big problem are ill thought out and not intellectually valid enough then where does that leave your little sarcastic sattire of their points that refuses to adress the logic behind each thought and instead attempts to group all opposing arguments in an infantile spoof of what you believe to be their stance?

That list, or whatever, is not attempting to do any of those things. Myself and another forum poster were bonding over the frustration of the attitudes in this forum. Why would I bother breaking down the logical problems of statements like "It's a game F U"?

It cheapens the entire argument and you climbed down to the level of those who's statements you believe to be unworthy of thinking about. You also completely simplify all the posts you're adressing to make them fit this idea that they're not worth taking on board.

'The biggest problem with your post is that you break your own word. You say people need to act grown up to have this conversation. But what did you do exactly? What is your post other than an obvious attempt to sound smart while trying to point out everything that was wrong with my posts? Why do you try to belittle me so much if you're so grown up? Take a look at your self duder. You don't come off smart with posts like that, but smarmy. If you wan't credibility, act mature. No one believes you want to be grown up when half your post is jabs and shit like "na na fellate themselves".'

And the crux of it is here, you felt like I was trying to belittle you when instead I was targeting your one post that came across as aloof and dismissive of other people's arguments. Of course my post was trying to point out everything wrong in that one particular post, it was an awful post that completely missed the point of the argument up to that juncture. Your 'criticism' of my post was a thinly veiled attempt to save face and make claims that I'm just a smarmy dick trying to look smart, take your own advice and try not to break down people's posts so much, it just results in these overly long posts and both sides looking like they think more of themselves than they should of which we are now both guilty as sin.

#88 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3309 posts) -

@Freshbandito: I don't think I have a superiority complex, but I do feel superior to you right now.

Why?

  • I've got a sense of humour, and I'm super handsome. And rich. So, so rich. But seriously, humour. Humour! See when I read your posts I put a Woody Allen voice on them and when I read my posts it's more like Larry David, just two dicks swinging, but no hard feelings. Somehow I get the feeling that is not your perspective. If you really read my post thinking "This mother thinks he can lecture me!?" then I guess it's my bad for thinking the net can communicate a grin, but oh well.
  • Your original post is a criticism of a joke. Yes it was dismissive, yes it was aloof, and no I don't need to save face! No where in that post does it say: This a dead serious redaction of the opinions expressed in this forum and yeah, fuck y'all. I can't believe I actually spent any time defending it, now that I think about it. Shit even spell checking it was probably a waste. You're not seriously going to say no one should ever make fun of posts on a forum are you? Well maybe you will and if so fair enough, but I can't swear to that sort of behaviour. Some comments really are not worth responding to seriously other than lumping them together and laughing at them. Now I know you're not going to say all comments are worth seriously discussing, are you?
  • Nazis are a different example. If you think the treatment of Nazis is equivalent to the level in question here, or the history of depictions of Arabs, for example, in these games, you may be out to lunch. These do not all sit on the same playing field, related as they may be. When I read your post I think you agree with this, but I don't know, since your own stance on this topic is still unclear to me.
  • So you know I'm kidding about feeling superior, right?

In the spirit of the season, let's start over, Freshbandito: What do you think of this level? If you want to put it in the context of CoD/video games and not isolate it as the OP did, fine, I will read your thoughts in full and respond without (much) smarmy smarmyness.

#89 Posted by Freshbandito (686 posts) -

@GERALTITUDE: We'll shelve the dicks and their pendulous swinging then. Your original list post rubbed me the wrong way and I leapt on it with no thought of "ahh don't take jokes like that so seriously" I'll admit now that I'm not operating on my 28th hour without sleep that I overreacted and got overly defensive.

I'll gladly start over and restrain any smarm, my opinion: I enjoyed the story overall though its treatment of historical events and people seems a bit disrespectful and tasteless. If there is a way for videogames to broach subjects like the Angolan civil war I don't think this is it and the beheading is not the worst of the issues when it comes to the games representation. The fact I enjoyed the story through these somewhat questionable takes on recent(ish) history either speaks to my desensitization or that the portrayals in the game aren't offensive or off base enough to stand out to me whilst playing the game, If I'm desensitized I'd be the last one to know I guess.

The decapitation with the machete appears in other areas of the game though so I don't think it was a thought along the lines of "hey it'd be cool if you could behead the mpla in angola!" and more a "hey you should be able to chop people's heads off with the machete whenever you get it in the game!" and like Jeff said alot of the extreme violence in this game comes across as more goofy than gritty or offensive, when I saw it happen it just looked kind of cheap to me.

#90 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3309 posts) -

I'm glad you brought up the "cheapness" of the effects. I remember thinking the whole sequence looked pretty arcadey. The way the heads come off you almost expect a digitized "3000 points!" or something to appear after each swipe. I'm watching the quick look again for reference and what does jar me a little bit, and what got me with No Russian too, was just the sheer amount of NPCs being mowed down. I don't know what it is but it does make me stutter a little. It just feels like a massacre. Maybe I get immersed too easily? I remember the first level of CoD4, on the boat, where you stab/shoot all those sleeping soldiers, feeling strange. But that was good strange. Or a different strange. Still, I felt the violence even there.

I wonder if this case is less or more bothersome to me because of its cheapness factor. Certainly it would be more disgusting if there were bloody limbs/guts and the infamous guy-from-saving-private-ryan-looking-for-his-leg but maybe it's the off-hand representation that comes across as tasteless (moreso than really truly "offensive") to me.

I tried to boil down what it is about this level that really irks me, and I realize it's what bothers me about most movies that take place in Africa too, so I'm definitely carrying my own prejudices into this game. It's such a standard depiction for current warfare in Africa to have these impassioned, powerful leaders commanding these murderous tribes of butchers (and it's almost always evil vs evil there). Dismemberment features really prominently in lots of "African fear-mongering" if I can call it that, which is why at first the machete is disconcerting. Though the game itself may or may not be a flagrant offender, it does exist as part of a larger group of offenders I think.

I want to pick out one line: "If there is a way for videogames to broach subjects like the Angolan civil war I don't think this is it".

Can we think of any non-strategy games that have smart/decent/ok depictions of war? What's the best games have put forward?

#91 Posted by Freshbandito (686 posts) -

@GERALTITUDE: The part about the level that kind of got to me was when the tide turns and you're basically gunning down fleeing people or watching them get shot in the back as they run. That part unsettled me alot more than the videogame-iness of the decapitation, it was the sort of moment where I was firing and then stopped and couldn't shoot anymore without feeling like a complete scumbag and I'll almost guarantee that wasn't their intent but a coincidence.

  • Can we think of any non-strategy games that have smart/decent/ok depictions of war? What's the best games have put forward?

I was convinced I'd be able to think of one given an hour or so but nothing jumps readily to mind barring any game that's mostly storytelling over gameplay, I'd even posit that it is maybe beyond current videogames to combine exciting gameplay and respectful treatment of subjects like the one we're talking about, I hope I'm wrong though.

#92 Posted by algertman (852 posts) -

@Redbullet685 said:

Because cutting off the heads of bad guys is awesome.

I think we're done here.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.