...Like, nuking every bit of common sense that can be rammed into a human's brain and getting yourself a dose of ultraviolent,nonsensical and still somehow "fun" game.

I am a gamer. I understand that as gamers, we are subject to lots of stereotypes and misconceptions. Much of the general crowd has a mental perception of a core gamer as that of an overweight teen whose butt is stuck to the couch in front of the T.V. And THAT is a misconception mind you.However there is something which even I have to agree with. Much of the core gaming crowd especially those addicted to more of the ultraviolent action games have become insensitive towards violence. And that's natural.

When you play games in which all you do most of the time is killing bad guys then immunity towards violence comes as a natural trait. However getting immune to violence doesn't mean you are becoming violent yourself. No. That's a completely different thing. I don't feel like jumping on the old violence debate right now so I will skip this.

So what's wrong with violence in games? Nothing at all, I say. Violence is a medium of expression. It is as necessary in action games like emotions and tears are a necessity in "epic" games and humor is necessary in wacky games. Without, violence and blood the cruelty and the gruesome circumstances under which many of the action games take place just cannot be described. This is a point which many fail to understand when they hop onto the anti-violence in Videogames bandwagon.

I used to love violence in video games whether it came in form of gore (Quake,Half Life) or in form of wacky humor (post-GTAIII and pre-GTA IV games). But all this was to change. My perception and my stance that violence should have no boundaries were completely turned over it's head when I played a certain game couple of months ago.That game was Grand Theft Auto IV .

And that's fact. The very series which glorified violence in video-games in it's over-the-top sandbox games actually made me tone down my views on "mindless violence". (Note here that I use the term "mindless violence" which refers to violence without any necessity nor any implication on the game. The sort of violence which occurs without logic). I never imagined that the series that actually gave birth to this "violence in videogames" debate in mainstream media would actually shut it's skeptics up with a thoroughly mature and sophisticated game.

There were certain situations in that game where I had to decide whether to kill a certain character or not. Having the life of a person at gunpoint in your hands was never realised to that much level of importance as it did in GTA IV. In one of the late missions in the game I actually locked-onto the person to be killed but just couldn't press the trigger button....now that comes from a guy who has fragged AI players thousands of times in Quake. That is something completely different from previous installments of GTA and some of it's rip-offs (more on that soon).

And thanks to GTA IV I have changed. Don't know whether it's for better or for worse. But I have changed. I still love action games. I love the "meaningful" violence within it. But I don't find any fun in mindlessly violent games any longer.

LIKE! Saints Row II . I have been in a particularly anti-Saints Row mood ever since I found out that it's going to be the same old mindless piece of gangsta action that the first one was. No offense but I am a thorough supporter of a certain thing called video game progression. I love to see video games progressing from game to game,series to series,generation to generation and so on...

And that's exactly what SRII DIDN'T do. It stuck true to it's promise of delivering the same old Saints Row fun to it's fans and hell it did. But that's just a mere excuse on the developer's part on not coming up with anything new. Not coming up with more substance than style for a genre that got an entire revamp earlier this year (read GTA IV). Not observing the changing trends of gaming.

I don't blame people who like SR2. It's a fun game no doubt WAY more fun than GTA IV ever was. But in terms of maturity and the amount of sheer class GTA IV showed in both gameplay innovation,plot narration and character development is a true tour de force of the genre.

While watching Saints Row II gameplay videos I feel so nostalgic. I can see that it's crazier than ever. Throwing people twenty feet far is cool. Driving around in a monster truck that blows everything that comes in it's way is uber-cool.Grown up men running around in ladies bra's and rocket launching cars. So funny isn't it? WELL IT'S NOT FOR ME!! There is violence without any sense. In GTA IV, Niko killed people because he had to. Here in SRII the lead character, Johnny Gat or something does it for gangsta pride and cash. *****!

I understand that SRII was in development well before GTA IV became a benchmark for the sandbox genre but seriously to people at Volition. WHAT'S THE USE OF MAKING A GAME IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING SERIOUSLY NEW WITH IT!!!!

While SRII may be releasing in 2008, it's still stuck in 2004. Why? Because it hasn't got rid of it's San Andreas hangover yet. Saints Row 1 was truly a next-gen San Andreas. And Saints Row II is exactly the same. WELL, SOMEONE has forgotten to do SOMETHING in between those TWO YEARS!! People are like "Ohh..God Bless Saints Row. GTA IV was so boring. So real. It felt as if I was watching a real-life story and not a video game." Does it mean that people don't want videogames to improve? Does it mean that few gamers want games to remain the same old,immaturely fun that they always were? Fun has become the motto of the day. Future is just chucked into the bin.

In a lower ring to SRII , Mercs 2 and Crackdown are two similar games which I rate in a similar category as SRII. I have to say that I fail to understand when some people keep raving about Mercs 2's explosions,"Mercs 2 is like so freaking cool! The explosions are so large and there is like unlimited ammo for rocket launchers which is so UBER-COOL!! Well again "IT'S A WTF ARE YOU MAD!?" moment. For God's sake, it's only an explosion. People seriously like a game because of it's explosions?
And don't get me even started on Crackdown. That game is just so full of itself. I can't resist laughing everytime I see the central guy jumping. It feels as if he's diving into a pool of vanilla or something. (WTF!)

I am not against fun in games. It's as important or perhaps even more important than sense and logic in videogaming. But my stance is strictly against such games which are made for the sole purpose of pleasing it's fans just because it is *insert a favorite trend in videogame*. I would love to play Saints Row III if it has progressed the "San Andreas-ish" gameplay forward. I wouldn't bet against the fact that SRIII if worked with true hard passion can even better San Andreas.

C ya

Lightwarrior

P.S: My terminals are finished. I am off playing FFVIII now. I am starting from all over again to experience it's awesomeness again.

Have fun with FFVIII. I enjoyed it. What will be the next game you play?

lightyagami-After I complete FFVIII, I might probably get busy with Gears 2 for a month. I plan to complete Persona 2 : Eternal Punishment soon too.
Then during Christmas most likely I plan on "borrowing" FFIX from my cousin. So that would complete every FF on PS1. :)

Have you played Saints Row 2?  That is the questions that came to mind after reading your blog.  Comparing it to GTA IV is not the way to go.  They are 2 different games entirely (now more than ever), even though they both use the Sandbox-type gameplay mechanic.  Saints Row 2 is really fun and it does not take itself seriously at all, while GTA IV took itself a bit too seriously.  I think the whole Hot Coffee scandal scared the boots off of Rockstar, so now they are afraid to do games in the same vein as San Andreas was.  Nonetheless, both are great games in their own right.

I enjoyed the decision making aspects of Grand Theft Auto IV, but at the end of the day, all of those characters who's "life" I had in my hands were just video game characters and I could always revert to the last save if I didn't like my decision. I think you shouldn't take Grand Theft Auto IV so seriously and just accept it as a game - not a life lesson.

DBoy- Yes I have,sir. Do you really expect me to make a blog about a game without even playing it? I am not of that fanboy type,sir.
Read my final highlighted section of the blog where I said that I don't have problem with the fun in Saints Row II but I have problem with how little it wants to improve itself on it's original. Yes there might be few additions in gameplay mechanics and modes but essentially SRII is the same game as the first.
Mind you I liked San Andreas a lot but somehow after playing GTA IV it just doesn't seem so fun to me.
SRII and GTA IV are miles different and they don't deserve to be compared. But then I have never compared them in terms of their gameplay.
I am just comparing at how big a step GTA IV is and how little (or even negligible) SRII is for their respective series.

AJMarra- Decision making along with the "greyish" ending were one of the key reasons why GTA IV was such a different action game. I am not taking it as a life lesson,dude. It has just driven a lesson into my mind about sandbox action games.....the genre has started taking itself more seriously which is good.