Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

Morale Of Video Games


sparhawk

Recommended Posts

From the other thread I just noticed. Some seem to think that FPS in particular or violence in video games in general serves the purpose of relieving some stress ecause otherwise we would be raving lunatics killing on the street.

 

At least for me this is certainly not the case. I doubt that I would be more agressive when I would have NOT computer as a hobby and the possibility to play violent games. If I kill a game character I don't really mind because it is just this. A game. It is the same as we played Cowboy and Indian as kids. We were shooting each other and "killing" us and nobody thought much about it, because it was also a game. The killing part of it was NOT because we would have hurt each other otherwise.

 

Of course, if a game character is well build up, so that you can emotionally attach to it, I'm more reluctant to kill it than some NPCs like the guards in Thief. But even so, it doesn't really matter. IN Gothic there was this annoying character that followed you around and continously interrupted your gameplay with silly talk. Gothic is very well done in that each character has a name and it is rather easy to relate to the character. Much easier than in most other games, which makes a big part of the realistic feeling of the gameworld. But after this guy getting so annying, I thought "well, it's just a game anyway"and so I killed him, because this was the only way to get rid of him.

 

The bottom line is: A video game is a game, and nothing more. And if you think the violence in a game has more relation to the realworld than it actually is, then the problem is your view of violence and not a problem of games in general.

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's not about the morality of it for me, it's about the principal.

A stealth game should not have to include a variety of weapons with which to kill everyone.

I can't think of a single reason why you MUST be given the weapons and abilty to kill people in a stealth game, yet everyone else seems to think that it's a must have, an automatic inclusion, the very first thing on the list of abilities, otherwise the game is restrictive and sucks.

Civillisation will not attain perfection until the last stone, from the last church, falls on the last priest.

- Emil Zola

 

character models site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. We already talked about that end over end. A game should provide more than one way of playing. If Guild Wars would be just monsterhacking it would be much more boring than it is. You can find other ways to succeed in a mission and this is what it makes interesting.

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think video-games serve as a guiltless release for real world desires. This, however, doesn't have to necessarily apply to violence, but could also apply to any untouched, unseen, or unsatified desire. I really believe that the games you choose, and the way you choose to play them, tell alot about your personality...not necessarily the skin your in, but that which lies beneath the skin.

 

We play video games as adults for the same reason we played Cowboys and Indians as kids...We all want to be something were not. Even if we're content, or even elated, to be what we are, we look for ways to satify our curiosity at things that never were or never will be.

 

Wanna be a Navy Seal? Wanna be an Archmage? Wanna be a Thief?

 

Violence, Crime, and Depravity follow the same pattern. Why do people love violence in games...We want to do things we can't. Notice I didn't say won't.

 

This will be an unpopular belief, but I'm more "Lord of the Flies" when it comes to human nature. I put that out there because it's an important subjective to my arguement.

 

As technology and collective intelligence increases, it becomes more and more possible for any average person to make his imagination interactive. The fact that games have become more violent or depraved is not coincidence or the product of "society", but of the collective unconcious mind.

Edited by Hylix Ulyx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're wrong Hylix. As I've said, many people, inlciding myself, play games for the challenge and skill required, jusy like a game of chess. And while the object of chess may be to beat your opponata in a battle of wits, it's not to physically damage him.

THis idea that we're all secretly violent thugs and want get it all out by pretending to kill in games is psychobabble nonsense.

I have no interest in violent games.

 

Sparhawk, hack and slash IS boring, so obviusly a game which only included it would be boring by default. A stealth game like thief whtout the lethal wepaons included would not be boring. I play the game without using any of the weapons and I am not bored.

Civillisation will not attain perfection until the last stone, from the last church, falls on the last priest.

- Emil Zola

 

character models site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion is that a well adjusted individual is no more likely to go rape and pillage after playing a violent videogame than after reading Catcher in the Rye or watching A Clockwork Orange.

 

There have always been people who "go postal" - yes, even before games were even invented. It usually has more to do with a person's personal life and relationships than any outside influences. Freud would argue that it's all formed in the first 5 years of your life, and that you probably always wanted to kill your father anyhow.

 

There seems to me to be no correlation between violent video games and violence in the real world. Vulnerable people, often ostricised from mainstream society often turn to cults, extreme ideologies, the occult, interpret books or music or videogames in a way that billions worldwide DO NOT. They would always find something. Helter Skelter for instance.

 

Should it disturb us that some people take satisfaction in seeing blood in videogames? I don't particularly think so. People want to feel a certain realism. As if their actions have meaningful consequences. However, this is still at a stage when anything we kill in games is not particularly lifelike. Graphics are good, sure, but they're far from realistic, let alone AI making us believe a character in a game is a real person.

 

I think that when technology is able to trick us more effectively into actually caring about any characters on a human or even animal level - then people will find it harder and harder to slaughter them without pause for reflection. Role playing games of course often give you that choice where FPS' don't. But since the characters you are dealing with are often 2D both graphically and emotionally, you don't really care. It's just roleplaying. You're playing a part, not yourself.

 

Black and White tried to tell you who you were by your actions. But in the end, you're playing a part. Sure, I occasionally felt guilty for killing loads of villagers mindlessly, but in the end, I didn't REALLY care. They're just a few polygons. In multiplayer games, I'm playing against real people, but I know they'll respawn just like I do.

 

I don't think any game has successfully immersed me enough to actually care about any of the characters in any real sense. Even with Half Life 2's stellar voice acting and great facial animations, the characters were well done, they made the game gripping. But you never had the choice about anyone you really cared about. You were always dispatching the faceless, alien enemies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've started reading Homer's Illiad recently and I can tell you there's plenty of graphic violence in it. It's been in entertainment for a long time, so dont listen to politicians who

just want to take your freedom.

I dont fear the dark...the dark fears me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not about the morality of it for me, it's about the principal.

A stealth game should not have to include a variety of weapons with which to kill everyone.

I can't think of a single reason why you MUST be given the weapons and abilty  to kill people in a stealth game, yet everyone else seems to think that it's a must have, an automatic inclusion, the very first thing on the list of abilities, otherwise the game is restrictive and sucks.

 

 

For me likewise. If I am in the mood for slaughter and mayhem, I will play an appropriately violent game such as UT, but most of the time I prefer strategy and flexing my brain as my means of completing a game. A bit of restriction can be a good thing, and there are some very compelling (IMO) reasons to not include many weapons for a stealth based thieving game:

 

*It focusses the game on using stealth as the means of copleting the task.

*It gives the game a bit more realism by not having the player carry an arsenal around hidden away in their back pocket.

*It frees up development time and resources for other more specifically thief based aspects of the game.

 

 

In my view, a mediaeval or victorian thief would carry the following items, and little more:

 

A bag or sack for collecting loot.

A set of lockpicks or similar tools.

A rope and grappling hook (optional).

A small knife, primarily for use as a tool, but could be used as a weapon in an emergency.

A throwable device or devices used as a decoy, such as powder thown into an attackers eyes, or a smoke bomb.

Maybe a flask of water and a small amount of food.

Maybe, maybe, a small crossbow or blowpipe that launches tranquilising darts.

Maybe a glass sphere or flask or two filled with a gas that renders people unconscious, for use in emergencies.

 

Anything else would be superflous, and would be too much of an encumberance to bother with (for a real thief). If a thief is discovered, the thief will want to get away as fast as possible so the guard or whoever can't get a good look at them, and they won't stick around to get into fisticuffs.

 

By eliminating superfluous weaponry, you can focus the stealth experience much more tightly, and it makes it much less work for FM authors to balance the game for one main method of completion than trying to cater for both the iron man tyoes and the ghoster types.

 

If I were going to rob someones mansion, I would take the following:

 

A small backpack, a small crowbar, a multitool or pocket knife, a set of lockicks, a small torch, and maybe a container of chloroform if I thought there was no other way to get past guards without immobilising them. The lighter you travel, the less noise you make, the less likely you are to be detected.

 

It would be nice if TDM had some mechanism to penalise players who carry excessive weaponry by making them noisier and bulkier, if they absolutely insist on keeping all the silly weapons that Thief had, but I guess I'll have to make do with whatever is released and mod it to fit my needs... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be nice if TDM had some mechanism to penalise players who carry excessive weaponry by making them noisier and bulkier

 

Let's see...blackjack: quiet. Short sword: pretty quiet. Bow and arrows: moderately quiet. Huge sack full of coins, plates and goblets: pretty damn loud. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A short sword is not going to be quiet in RL if you keep banging it on things when you are sneaking about in the dark... A blackjack will be very loud if it is actually used - a blow to the skull generates a fairly decent noise, and thesound of a person collapsing is pretty distinctive. All of these items are very bulky and create a fairly obvious profile of a heavily armed person,, even if you can carry them qietly, they will weigh you down unnecessarily.

 

And I never said anything about the sack being huge, quite the contrary, it would be relatively small, large items would have to be carried by hand.

 

EDIT: If you pack coins tightly enough they will not make any noise, and I also favour more realistic loot collection limitations.

 

The bow and a quiver full of assorted arrows is a most cumbersome and bulky item for a thief to be carrying, and magic arrows aside it is pretty useless. Shooting someone with an arrow is unlikely to be stealthy unless you are lucky enough to get a head shot, and even then that is a gamble - many people have remained conscious after larger objects have embedded in the brain. Arrows make a faily audible and distinct sound.

 

I can handle the thief carrying flashbombs, they make sense, as do gas mines. Real thieves travel light, so they can run/hide easily. Carrying a sword, even a small one is a weight you don't need. Carrying a bow and arrows adds to your profile, and makes it more difficult to slip into narrow spaces. Engaging guards in any form of aggressive way attracts all the wrong kinds of attention.

 

A modern RL thief might carry a pistol (obviously I am disregarding bank robbers who go for the hold up with a sawnoff shotgun approach), but they would discretely conceal this so they could walk down the street without attracting too much suspicion.

Edited by obscurus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"A short sword is not going to be quiet in RL if you keep banging it on things when you are sneaking about in the dark"

 

With the scabbard bound to your leg it won't flap around like a wet fish, and being covered in leather it wouldn't make much sound even if it did. I find it hard to believe a cosh hitting a skull produces a "distinctive" sound. More like a soft thump, perhaps something heavy onto a carpet, or a book onto a desk.

 

"and thesound of a person collapsing is pretty distinctive."

 

The devs say we'll have to lower bodies to the floor anyway.

 

"The bow and a quiver full of assorted arrows is a most cumbersome and bulky item for a thief to be carrying, and magic arrows aside it is pretty useless. Shooting someone with an arrow is unlikely to be stealthy unless you are lucky enough to get a head shot, and even then that is a gamble - many people have remained conscious after larger objects have embedded in the brain."

 

From shortish range, the likelihood of both death and accuracy is high. Remember this thief is supposed to be a master bowman, not some joe off the street.

 

"Arrows make a faily audible and distinct sound."

 

Audible, yes. Distinct, no. Hitting wood, they tend to make a loud bang, as if someone knocked something hard against a wall. An arrow from long range tends to sound more like a knock or clatter While I've never heard an arrow hit someone's skull, I imagine the sound is quite similar to that of an arrow hitting wood. You have to remember that while a Thief may be acting suspiciously, those in the household will be quite used to bustle and noise, and would not be suspicious unless something occurred quite close by.

 

"Engaging guards in any form of aggressive way attracts all the wrong kinds of attention."

 

Engaging implies tackling head on. The surreptitious taking down of guards who are alone is something quite different.

 

Incidentally, I wonder whether loadouts would be a good idea? A player could choose whether to carry weapons, and if so which. If they take too much gubbins then they become slower, as you did on TMA/DP when you took out the sword or bow. I think the idea was that you hid your weapons beneath a cloak when not in use so your profile was less likely to catch attention, but whatever - it would be an interesting choice to have to make, and might encourage people to take the stealthier option. If you thought you could manage without gas mines and so on, perhaps you could move very very fast and quietly...

--

Somethin' fishy's goin' on here... Come on out, you taffer!

 

~The Fishy Taffer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you pack coins tightly enough they will not make any noise, and I also favour more realistic loot collection limitations.

 

Well, however you slice it, you have to work a lot harder to keep loot quiet than you do to keep weapons quiet.

 

A player could choose whether to carry weapons, and if so which. If they take too much gubbins then they become slower

 

We've discussed this, but again, it doesn't make much sense to slow a thief down for carrying a short sword, but allow him to carry fifty pounds of loot without penalty.

 

The FM author can always limit the tools/weapons available, and the player can always choose not to take available ones with him, so people should be able to satisfy their own personal tastes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I forget what the outcome of the loot management was, except that there were lots of hairbrained schemes, most of which got shouted down by everyone except the proponent. Even so, I don't think many would care if you did opt to implement such a system... I'm just wondering that, without penalty it has to be a choice out of the goodness of your heart, rather than a weighing up of the advantages and disadvantages.

--

Somethin' fishy's goin' on here... Come on out, you taffer!

 

~The Fishy Taffer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A loot system is an added complication the game doesn't need.

 

without penalty it has to be a choice out of the goodness of your heart, rather than a weighing up of the advantages and disadvantages.

 

It's about how you prefer to play the game. You don't need to penalize or reward people for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A loot system is an added complication the game doesn't need.

 

I agree, at least to the extent that I can't be bothered really thinking about it.

 

It's about how you prefer to play the game. You don't need to penalize or reward people for that.

 

Interesting way of thinking about it. The thing is going in without weapons clearly has disadvantages, and you're unlikely to convince players to try out something new if they're very happy with using weapons if there is no incentive.

 

Nonetheless, I can certainly see where you're coming from.

--

Somethin' fishy's goin' on here... Come on out, you taffer!

 

~The Fishy Taffer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A stealth game like thief whtout the lethal wepaons included would not be boring. I play the game without using any of the weapons and I am not bored

 

the game includes your source of fun..

then why is so painful for you if the game also includes those things you're not using?

why does it bother you if someone is not having fun your way..

 

btw thats like saying 'i like playing games on my own only ...i dont need the Multi player option..get rid of it..those who'd like playing it on net should buy another game...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that games have become more violent or depraved is not coincidence or the product of "society", but of the collective unconcious mind.

 

Well I'm not a part of the Hive Mind I guess.

 

One Thief player told me that when he got home from a frustrating day work, he would load up a Thief mission and go around whacking the helpless servents to death to vent his frustration of the annoying co-workers.

 

I can't fathom how anyone could get a sense of satisfaction out of that.

 

When I find myself in a similar mood, the most satisfying use of video games is to channel that pent up energy into playing better than I ever have, and beating something that has a purpose, especially if its about defeating some evil characters to defend some helpless people.

 

I crave the excitement and action, but its the thrill of suceeding against amazing odds that I find entertaining, not inflicting suffering...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"A short sword is not going to be quiet in RL if you keep banging it on things when you are sneaking about in the dark"

 

With the scabbard bound to your leg it won't flap around like a wet fish, and being covered in leather it wouldn't make much sound even if it did. I find it hard to believe a cosh hitting a skull produces a "distinctive" sound. More like a soft thump, perhaps something heavy onto a carpet, or a book onto a desk.

 

"and thesound of a person collapsing is pretty distinctive."

 

The devs say we'll have to lower bodies to the floor anyway.

 

"The bow and a quiver full of assorted arrows is a most cumbersome and bulky item for a thief to be carrying, and magic arrows aside it is pretty useless. Shooting someone with an arrow is unlikely to be stealthy unless you are lucky enough to get a head shot, and even then that is a gamble - many people have remained conscious after larger objects have embedded in the brain."

 

From shortish range, the likelihood of both death and accuracy is high. Remember this thief is supposed to be a master bowman, not some joe off the street.

 

"Arrows make a faily audible and distinct sound."

 

Audible, yes. Distinct, no. Hitting wood, they tend to make a loud bang, as if someone knocked something hard against a wall. An arrow from long range tends to sound more like a knock or clatter While I've never heard an arrow hit someone's skull, I imagine the sound is quite similar to that of an arrow hitting wood. You have to remember that while a Thief may be acting suspiciously, those in the household will be quite used to bustle and noise, and would not be suspicious unless something occurred quite close by.

 

"Engaging guards in any form of aggressive way attracts all the wrong kinds of attention."

 

Engaging implies tackling head on. The surreptitious taking down of guards who are alone is something quite different.

 

Incidentally, I wonder whether loadouts would be a good idea? A player could choose whether to carry weapons, and if so which. If they take too much gubbins then they become slower, as you did on TMA/DP when you took out the sword or bow. I think the idea was that you hid your weapons beneath a cloak when not in use so your profile was less likely to catch attention, but whatever - it would be an interesting choice to have to make, and might encourage people to take the stealthier option. If you thought you could manage without gas mines and so on, perhaps you could move very very fast and quietly...

 

 

Any object hitting the skull will generate a loud sound. Try it. A cosh soft enough to muffle the sound will be much less effective at inducing unconsciousness, and you might have a quiet whack, with a loud "ouch, that frickin hurt" to follow.

 

Master bowman or not (and I think a master thief would have no need to be a master bowman), an arrow fired at point blank range will not guarantee lethality, even in the head. For a head or heart shot it might be 90 - 99%, anywhere else it will be a slow, drawn out, noisy death. Sure, you could be successful, but the risks that you won't, coupled with the cumbersome burden of carrying a bow and a quiver full of arrows mean that it would not be worth the thief's while to carry one. The sound of an arrow flying through the air is fairly distinctive - I have fired a few off myself, and the noise of an arrow in the air is pretty easy to pick, even from a distance (though granted, arrows can be made more quiet, but at the expense of accuracy). This is irrespective of the sound of the arrow hitting it's target.

 

The point is that a real thief would not bother with a bow and arrow, because they want to be able to lithely slip between narrow objects, hide under beds and cupboards, and to do so without arrows and swords rattling around and getting in the way. They don't want to be weighed down any more than absolutely necessary so they can run like hell if they need to. A real thief would also drop their loot rather than get caught.

 

 

OK, there are circumstances where a thief could get away with a stealthy kill, but a knife to the throat from behind should be sufficient, and while messy, the victim will only be able to gurgle and thrash around a bit - moderately noisy, but about as quiet as you can expect. The only weapon a thief should or would carry is a knife or dagger. Anything more is not only unnecessary, it is a burden that would detract from the main objective by increasing the risk of being captured and or killed.

 

And the thief should not be able to carry 50 pounds worth of loot - maybe 15.

 

Also, a real thief would be more inclined to pick up an object close at hand if there was no alternative to combat, and discard it after use.

 

So I would rather be able to pick up a lump of wood or a metal bar to KO someone, then drop it afterwards, rather than have a BJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny thing is there are many studies showing that violent computer games can make a person more aggressive or also the other way around. I wonder if there was ever a study like this. Make a computer game where you connect the person to some wires and give her electroshocks in relation to the game. Then tell her that the other characters in the game are also real persons and are also experiencing the pain when you hit their character, just as you are experiencing it. Now the next step would be to give the subject a kill option like in any shooter and tell the subject that this really means the other person could get killed. Would it do it? I doubt it. As soon as the person would believe that it would really kill I guess the game would stop being a game, just like kids don't really kill when playing cowboy and indian.

On a sidenote, I think I read that there was a test done with nuclear weapons, where the personall thought it was the real thing. 50% of the military personall did NOT press the button.

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They did a study like that with giving electroshocks to people. The participants thought they were shocking someone else in another room when that person didn't respond to the question over the audio comm line in time, and they were supposed to keep turning up the intensity of the shocks. The other person was actually in on it and not being shocked, but as the shocks got more and more, they made agonized noises and then stopped making any noises at all.

 

The people giving the shocks also had the study supervisors instructing them to keep giving the shocks, so it was kind've a test of how far you follow authority too.

 

A number of people continued shocking them for a while even when they weren't getting any response and for all they knew the person was dead. I forget what the study was called.

 

For some reason, I don't think they allow studies like that anymore. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a sidenote, I think I read that there was a test done with nuclear weapons, where the personall thought it was the real thing. 50% of the military personall did NOT press the button.

 

And in wars it seems that over 50% of soldiers ( I think it was even higher than that) do not shoot to kill. Apparently most of the killing as done by about 20% of psychopaths. People who won medals for bravery etc, are all psychos as well, like people who storm an enemy trench single handed and kill everyone.

You have to be a 'special' sort of person to do something like that.

THe percntage of killers in the army is much better these days though, soldiers recieve much better psychological training.

Civillisation will not attain perfection until the last stone, from the last church, falls on the last priest.

- Emil Zola

 

character models site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And in wars it seems that over 50% of soldiers ( I think it was even higher than that) do not shoot to kill."

 

It is my understanding that they are not instructed to shoot to kill, anyway, as an enemy out of action but not dead requires less dealing with... or something.

 

"Any object hitting the skull will generate a loud sound."

 

As will any object falling on the floor, or on a table, or in the kitchen. The sound of a thump or bang is not going to attract much attention in a large house with all sorts of goings on. Even in a smaller house you don't get up at every bang and clatter, because things that go "bump" in the night are usually innocuous.

 

Master bowman or not (and I think a master thief would have no need to be a master bowman), an arrow fired at point blank range will not guarantee lethality, even in the head. For a head or heart shot it might be 90 - 99%, anywhere else it will be a slow, drawn out, noisy death. Sure, you could be successful, but the risks that you won't, coupled with the cumbersome burden of carrying a bow and a quiver full of arrows mean that it would not be worth the thief's while to carry one. The sound of an arrow flying through the air is fairly distinctive - I have fired a few off myself, and the noise of an arrow in the air is pretty easy to pick, even from a distance (though granted, arrows can be made more quiet, but at the expense of accuracy). This is irrespective of the sound of the arrow hitting it's target.

 

Bull. Arrows are virtually silent in the air. From a high power bow that's been taken care of in order to be as silent as possible, the loudest sound is the arrow hitting the target, next a kind of spitting sound as the arrow leaves the bow. At point blank range, an arrow in the head would almost certainly be lethal. At more than 20 yards or so, less likely. However, if a Thief carries a bow, one can assume he is capable of using it. Otherwise, there is a lack of point in carrying it.

 

So I would rather be able to pick up a lump of wood or a metal bar to KO someone, then drop it afterwards, rather than have a BJ.

 

And how many of those do you find knocking around a medieval mansion? :rolleyes:

 

One Thief player told me that when he got home from a frustrating day work, he would load up a Thief mission and go around whacking the helpless servents to death to vent his frustration of the annoying co-workers.

 

I can't fathom how anyone could get a sense of satisfaction out of that.

 

Because you are now the master, you control these servants, and their lives or deaths. You know your violence has no real world effect, but it satisfies a need for vengeance, as it provides the same sensations vengeance would, only without the specific people in mind. When coworkers are getting it you, it really doesn't matter who it is - you are trying to switch roles with something, anything, and be master of it. It may not be productive but it gets some of the stress out of the system.

--

Somethin' fishy's goin' on here... Come on out, you taffer!

 

~The Fishy Taffer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can appreciate that. I just can't relate to it. My stress releif method is different (as I described). My main point being that I'm not one of the people who are responsible for the rise of violence in video games. I rather think that its just a convention that's followed, without much research. I remember reading that more generally appealing movies and games (eg. Disney movies, Myst, Sims) generate way more money than violent ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying violent video games cause violent people, I'm simply saying that the desire to play those games comes from a very basic, primal, universal place. To me, playing "UT", GTA, or Soldier of Fortune provides the same cathartic experience as the Romans had in the Colosseum. The only difference is that the blood is made of digital information and not organic matter, and we get to do all that killing.

 

And, Oddity, I'm not wrong. I've said before, Chess is nothing more than a mathematical, grid based war simulator, whose primary objective consists of dominating your opponent. Anyone who plays a game called "Thief", and doesn't see the implicit moral deficit, rides a horse named "Irony"...murder isn't the only mark of the Baser Self. Even ghosting a level in Thief is nothing more than exercising control. You don't have to kill the guards to demonstrate your dominance over them.

 

And Dom, if going on a Thief killing spree is so strange, why is such a pat on the back to steal everything in Bafford's manor and not be seen. That's equally as benign and pointless as killing everyone and attaining somekind of satisfaction...either way, they're just pixels, polygons, and equations.

 

The first time you opt not to play Thief because you think it wrong to steal Lord Bafford's things, then you will have attained a kind of enlightenment few will ever know.

 

Virtually any game, beit sports, video, or puzzle, or card, is a simple ply for dominance. Even the Modern Olympics is nothing more than a "My Country can kick Your Countries' ass" contest. The basic point of ANY game is dominance and control over something, or someone, else. Even solitaire is merely an exercise in controlling the odds.

 

Which leads me to my next corollary: Humanity has lived by one simply creed; That which will not adapt to Humanity will be destroyed by Humanity. I think the evidence bares this out exclusively.

 

What's that have to do with solitaire...well, like gambling, it's a desperate ploy to control the odds, to wrest control and dominance over probablity and chaos. Like sky diving, or cracking the human genome, or building the atomic bomb, or beating your best friend at poker...it's all the same.

 

"But Hylix", you say, "What the hell does that have to do with violence in games?"

 

I'll tell you: As technology catches up with our subconcious desires, so too does the ability for those subconcious desires to be realised on a concious level, by everyone.

 

That's why there's more nudity, sex, violence, depravity, gore, drug abuse, theft, voyeurism...in games then ever before; It's all there, under the skin, and there's no one to blame but ourselves.

 

You cannot cure a disease if you ignore the symptoms.

 

Edit: Almost forgot to P.S. this monologue with "just my opinion".

Edited by Hylix Ulyx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Virtually any game, beit sports, video, or puzzle, or card, is a simple ply for dominance."

 

Well said. Surprisingly little of what we do is anything more than pandering to our base instincts. In fact, when you're ghosting through Thief, you're even worse: "I am better for I can do this without resorting to X." Again it is a simple one-upping contest. Of course, personal preference has a say in it all, so oDDity's argument that he prefers to play without violence is fine, although it's best to recognise that a) there's no one true way of playing and B) you're no better than anyone else for having your preference.

 

When I am playing Thief, I play it for a completely different reason to that for which I play UT or Legends. Thief I play to be immersed, to be told a story and to be drawn in. The sneaking around is part of that - the gamier aspect. When playing UT, I couldn't care less about immersion or plot; I play it for thrills and adrenaline. When playing deathmatch, it is a one-upping contest in the form of a reactions-fest. In Onslaught or Legends it is outthinking my opponent; using my weapons and strategies to overcome them. However, not once do I forget that the enemies on the battleground are humans at their computers - it is an entirely different experience to that which Thief provides.

--

Somethin' fishy's goin' on here... Come on out, you taffer!

 

~The Fishy Taffer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recent Status Updates

    • Petike the Taffer

      I've finally managed to log in to The Dark Mod Wiki. I'm back in the saddle and before the holidays start in full, I'll be adding a few new FM articles and doing other updates. Written in Stone is already done.
      · 4 replies
    • nbohr1more

      TDM 15th Anniversary Contest is now active! Please declare your participation: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22413-the-dark-mod-15th-anniversary-contest-entry-thread/
       
      · 0 replies
    • JackFarmer

      @TheUnbeholden
      You cannot receive PMs. Could you please be so kind and check your mailbox if it is full (or maybe you switched off the function)?
      · 1 reply
    • OrbWeaver

      I like the new frob highlight but it would nice if it was less "flickery" while moving over objects (especially barred metal doors).
      · 4 replies
    • nbohr1more

      Please vote in the 15th Anniversary Contest Theme Poll
       
      · 0 replies
×
×
  • Create New...