One of the most valuable games for the press in the year 2014 seems to be Hatred. On the first look a mediocre dual stick shooter which was produced like this only better many times. A gritty look, a dark protagonist on a rampage and masses of dead civilians later and we have one of the most talked about games of the year. Not because it is technically good or appealing, not because the story is well thought out and gives us an inside look into the mind of someone who is on a rampage, but simply because the gaming press likes to generate as much klicks through dramatic overreactions as possible.

The game wouldn't have gained much traction wouldn't it be for the hundreds of article which were released in the last couple of days. A simple google search spits out hundreds of results and sites like Polygon released four articles about the game in two days. We're in an echo chamber of an industry which likes to hear themselves talk because of the sake of it. There is absolutely no need to discuss this game in the form it is done at the moment. It should be taken for what it is, an attempt of gaining PR through shock value. Nothing in this game stands out. Even the most criticized point, the brutality was matched or was even surpassed in other games like Mortal Kombat, Gears of War, Soldier of Fortune and so on.

The game pushes absolutely no boundaries in terms of violence, still the press is quick on judging because they think the game is morally wrong. And that's also the only selling point the publisher has. On the site of the developer Destructive Creations you find the following quote:

We say ‘yes, it is a game about killing people’ and the only reason of the antagonist doing that sick stuff is his deep-rooted hatred. Player has to ask himself what can push any human being to mass-murder. We provoke this question using new Unreal Engine 4, pushing its physics (or rather PhysX) systems to the limits and trying to make the visuals as good as possible.

Destructive Creations website

So the game is basically driven by nothing and the only purpose is to run around killing people in seven levels open world levels. That doesn't warrant any hype to be honest. I can do the same thing in Skyrim if I want to, it's just not the main purpose of the game. To be honest I can do that in almost every open world game with emphasis on fighting. That alone shouldn't warrant any coverage at all. The game doesn't offer anything besides of the questionable morality still journalists feel the need to repeat themselves over and over, trying to create a controversy which doesn't exist and giving the game exposure it doesn't deserve. It just shows again that we're willing to push something because of it's drama value instead of focusing onto the aspects of the game which really matter.

In the end Hatred has all the right in the world to be developed and published. The only thing it doesn't deserve is the exposure it gets. The gaming press will push this game so long until it gets picked up by major TV networks and a new "Are games going to far" campaign starts in the major media. And in half a month we're sitting here and asking ourselves why the big media always picks the bad apples for their coverage. Because our own media pushes them to it.

Yeah pretty much. Though people are talking about it now I doubt that translates to sales. Plenty of people will boycott it, it's iffy that Steam will even offer it on their store, and once videos of it's inevitably bland gameplay reach the public most people's curiosity will be slaked. Let the bloggers have their fun, it's all they've got left.

And if it's gaming's reputation you're worried about... well that shipped has sailed. Just enjoy the decline my friend.

I wonder if it will be Quick Looked.

i like that the logo is kinda like dooms

...and it turns out from outsider's perspective it's just some goof dual weilding Nerf Blasters at everyone :) :) :)

I don't really agree that the violence of other video games, like the ones you mentioned, are on par with the material presented in the Hatred trailer. The trailer shows regular people in a real life setting fleeing and begging for their lives as their brutally executed by the player character, which isn't something you really see in GTA or Skyrim. Some games have done this before (Modern Warfare 2 comes to mind), but those moments have been story driven and not just for the sake of violence. The violence in Hatred really does come across as more disturbing.

As much as it would have made me happy to see this game be ignored, I really don't blame press for jumping all over it, especially in light of recent mass shootings. It kind of reminds me more of that Columbine RPG than your run-of-the-mill violent shooter.

The game isn't out yet, and that which you purport to dislike is exactly what you are doing.

There is a lot of hypocrisy in the world. It doesn't begin or end with game websites who dislike something based solely on it's horrible PR campaign and empty seeming game.

I'll play it when it comes out and figure out what it's worth is on my own just as I did with Postal and Postal 2. Since it seems no one else can look at it in a similar "objective" vein. To be fair, though, no one did with the Postal games either.

Hatred is a stunt and so far it's worked. The only way to win is to not play the game, and by that I don't mean Hatred I mean don't bother with all of the repetitive, targeted click-bait nonsense even to go in there and disagree with them or whatever.

There is a winning strategy in online media these days of advancing unreasonable commentary because the goal isn't to present a strong argument but to draw in a minority of people who will reflexively defend that view point and a large majority of those who don't but need to click on it anyway to explain why it's poor.

@cornbredx: I don't think so as I want to talk about how this game is perceived in the press. Every other game which looks like this and offers a trailer like it does would be rather ignored or honored with a small article wouldn't it be for the over the top violence. You can judge the graphics of a game by it's trailer and they aren't really outstanding. The developer himself says that there is no story attached to the game so I don't just assume that when I write it. Basically the game doesn't warrant it's coverage and when the gaming press condemns News networks for their coverage on games during mass shootings, they do the exact same thing when a controversial game comes out.

It looks better visually than any DJS i've ever seen. But I cant say i've ever enjoyed one that wasnt Smash TV or Geometry Wars. So for me there isnt much interest besides 'Unreal 4 y'all' which is enough for me to play it. (It doesnt take much)

@octaslash:

I don't think Columbine RPG is a fair comparison. That game had a purpose in satirizing media frenzy and doomsaying (literal "Doom"saying, in fact). Hatred doesn't appear to be satirizing anything.

@koolaid said:

Doubtful. The site has already taken a firm stance on not even uploading the trailer. Well, I say site, but it was exclusively Alex and Patrick that have stated that they don't want to give it any more exposure beyond their twitter comments. That said, there's no trailer so, I would have to assume the rest (@jeff) feel the same way?

Guess it'll ultimately depend on whether or not this game turns out to be something more than what it's currently pushing.

The game looks terrible and all it has going for it is its trying to hard to be edgy bullshit. The fact that we all didn't roll our eyes and looked away in disgust for it to be forgotten is baffling to me. The correct response was one good "this is stupid" and maybe a laugh or two. How can people be offended by something this immature and juvenile? It is a grim dark murder simulator called Hatred made by a bunch of racist assholes.. If that doesn't warrant a dismissive wanking motion then I don't know what does. Spoiler, by the way, there is no chance in hell that this turns out to be good. None. How do I know that? Well, I can look at all the decisions that team has made up to this point and can tell that they aren't the brightest bunch. I mean, they are the ones making the game. They all collectively seemed to have thought they had good ideas. They don't, but they thought they did.

Then again, who knows, maybe they did what they did because they knew controversy generates coverage. If that was the aim then they got it. However, I maintain my stance because if the game was good on its own it wouldn't need the guaranteed to offend presentation.

@envirosani said:

It doesn't matter why. You are still talking about it. So, you're a hypocrite by definition as what you are talking about is how you dislike the press talking about this game which warrants no recognition or discussion (that's what you're saying).

Every other game which looks like this and offers a trailer like it does would be rather ignored or honored with a small article wouldn't it be for the over the top violence.

Your grammar is hard to decode here (I'm not being mean, I am legitimately straining to understand this sentence), but I think what you're saying is any other game like this one would be ignored if it didn't have over the top/sadistic/gross violence. I'm saying you can't know that until you've played it. They're in the PR phase and you ()just like the press) are doing what they want you to. You're talking about it.

You can judge the graphics of a game by it's trailer and they aren't really outstanding..

Graphics do not make or break a game so this is neither here nor there. Postal 1 in it's day was not a technical powerhouse. I know because I bought it on day 1. Postal 2 was broken on day 1. This was mostly fixed and not even an issue if you play it now. The game is still stupid fun- despite the terrible things it lets you do. But I digress.

The developer himself says that there is no story attached to the game so I don't just assume that when I write it.

The developer is indy and will do anything to get people talking about the game. I don't blame them, I would. It's the same thing Vince Desi did. I don't really listen to PR. That doesn't mean the game isn't empty, but I can't judge it until I play it.

Basically the game doesn't warrant it's coverage and when the gaming press condemns News networks for their coverage on games during mass shootings, they do the exact same thing when a controversial game comes out.

But yet it warrants you to bring it up. It's ok if you do it, but not the gaming press? I see. We will have to agree to disagree on that.

This game warrants discussion, but not the discussion people are having- which is to say a knee jerk reaction to shitty PR.

The developer knows what attention this will garner. They're taking that gamble; it's worth it to them to do so. The discussion this game should hold is what it's merits are and that can only be found after it's released and someone has played it. Condemn it if it's empty, shallow, and without merit then. Don't condemn it before it even exists based on PR whose sole job is to get people to know the game exists.

I'd say as shitty as it is, the viral marketing this game has done has 100% paid off for them, and not only because of the enthusiast "press." People such as yourself are doing the job just fine too. That's how viral marketing works, though.

@cornbredx:

It doesn't matter why. You are still talking about it. So, you're a hypocrite by definition as what you are talking about is how you dislike the press talking about this game which warrants no recognition or discussion (that's what you're saying).

I can understand some points you make, but not that one. If it wasn't for the coverage this game is receiving I wouldn't even talk about it. I also don't want to talk about the game at all but about the reaction it gets. It's hard to that without even mentioning the game.

Your grammar is hard to decode here

I'm sorry, but you got it right. English isn't my first language and sometimes my sentences are structured a bit weird, sorry for that.

I guess I don't really have a problem with this game being made, it's pretty much the same game as Postal and Postal 2 except for the more serious tone. Personally, I find the material pretty disgusting and I've no desire to play as a human piece of shit, but when Postal 2 came out my stupid teenage brain didn't have a problem with it and thought it was at least somewhat funny. There is no humor to this game so I guess my young self would basically be indifferent to it.

I guess what I'm saying is that these depictions of the worst part of humanity are present in every form of media and it has been in videogames for a long time. So I think the shock people have been experiencing by it comes from the fact that a game like this hasn't come out for a while other than the odd shit game made by neo-nazis that looked like it should have come out 10 years earlier and about 5 people have played.

The fact is the most attention this game should have gotten is people saying "wow, this game looks dumb" and leave it at that. The ironic part is that all the attention that sites like Polygon have given it in order to decry its existence are probably going to be by far the major contributor to this game's success.

I don't think the media is wrong in covering the game, but they need to consider the real reason why they are writing these articles. If they are really trying to denounce the game and want to see it fail then they have failed miserably and all but ensured the games success. This is where the cynic in me says that their outrage is just the narrative they've chosen and the only thing they really care about is ad revenue. But that's why I don't give those sites any attention in the first place.

Anyway, this game and its creators don't deserve any more of my mental capital.

On the Playstation TV UPF with Jeff/Dan the question of "How many games have aped the Doom box art?" came up. Probably warrants its own concept page.

I think the fact that this game is practically the same as many other game is exactly why it is interesting, despite the disgusting presentation by the devs. It really calls into attention the importance of context and theming in games. It's like the whole 'kiss your wife' discussion taken to an extreme, like comparing Chulip to Manhunt because they both have the "sneak behind a dude and press X" mechanic or something. There's some intellectual value to it.

I don't think it really matters whether the devs deserve this sort of attention or not. It's pretty obvious what it is at face value, because it's at least honest about how morally questionable it is. Someone's not going to see this and uncharacteristically think, "Maybe there's something cool about murdering a bunch of strangers after all..." There are many other games that are implicitly waay more questionable (Hatred hasn't yet promoted major arms manufacturers, for one), and most video game publications cover them without anyone batting an eye. When someone calls them out, they'd get criticized for being too politically sensitive. I don't want the press to stop covering this game just to spite the developers, I think they could do better than that.

I personally think this game shows how Morally outraged people can get over something they disagree with.

And i find it hilarious.We haven't played the game or seen anything more than the 70 second gameplay trailer.But everywhere i see the old tired "This game is bad and you should feel bad" for even wanting to try and play it.

I even saw brilliant suggestions in the youtube comments such as "This should be censored" and "You should make the people into vampires this is problematic". I laughed heartily.

Brutality and murdering for its own sake has proven that it has its place in most other media.And by judging the likes/dislikes on the video of Hatred I'm guessing it will have a good receiving(if it is not a broken piece of s).But the moral outrage and people "TAKING A STAND" against it seems far to similar to the days of past where people were outraged over mortal kombat.

@pepipopa: Maybe people would be less inclined to be upset about the game/take it seriously if the people making it were, well, more worthy of being taken seriously. A couple of them have ties to fascist groups, they use smiley faces in the description for the game like they are instant message their best friend and the general tone of the game comes off as "Isn't killing people fun/funny?" To which people responded "nope"

Maybe if there was some merit or point to the game it would be different. Manhunt was trying to be dark and serious. Postal 2 was trying to be outrageous and funny, No Russian was trying to show off brutality and discomfort.
What is Hatred trying to accomplish? Put on your favorite teen angst album and murder people? It just comes off as childish and gross.

@zolroyce: You are not wrong, so don't take my nerdiness that way, but I have to correct something here:

Manhunt was trying to be dark and serious.

No it wasn't. It was trying to make the video game form of a snuff film

That's all.

I think one thread about this game is plenty for now, it's all essentially the same discussion anyway.

http://www.giantbomb.com/hatred/3030-48060/forums/hatred-a-game-which-just-might-garner-some-attenti-1497252/#371