4 ms·

I think I've tl;dr'd this correctly: "I won't work on FPSes because they're [excessively?] violent and I'm ashamed of contributing to it". Which is a great re

by Groxx 14y ago

I think I've tl;dr'd this correctly: "I won't work on FPSes because they're [excessively?] violent and I'm ashamed of contributing to it". Which is a great reason, I wish them luck! I'd say it's slightly mis-aimed - it's not just FPSes - but it's a start. I'd love to have a whole variety of blockbusters that aren't the standard fare we have now, and more people working on other things makes it more likely to happen.

TillE 14y ago
> it's not just FPSes Quite right. Violence is the simplest form of human conflict, the one we can most easily adapt to games. Even chess is an abstraction of war strategy. But personally, I'm much more OK with fairly abstract strategy games than I am with games that shove a gun in your hands and shower you with blood. It's exhausting. I have no problem with those games existing on the market, I'm just so very tired of the fact that nearly every big-budget game centers on shooting people in the face. Or stabbing them. If nothing else, I've been doing that in videogames for the past 20 years now (since Wolf3d and Doom), and it's getting boring.
- pms 14y ago
  Well, it is damn boring.
  - __david__ 14y ago
    For you, maybe. Not everyone holds that opinion.
    - pms 14y ago
      I realize :)
- anigbrowl 14y ago
  If nothing else, I've been doing that in videogames for the past 20 years now (since Wolf3d and Doom), and it's getting boring. I've had this problem too for the last several years. I like 3d, and I like hyper-realistic game environments, and I like science fiction. But I am sick to the back teeth of gore, and of being confronted by hideous mutants/ zombies/ creatures that I'm supposed to splatter all over the walls. I play games far less than I used to because I'm tired of this horror element. What gets me is that even within these genre conventions, there seem to be very few new ideas. How come I don't see survival-horror games based around super-powered alien insects that can walk on the ceiling? Why isn't there a Terminator game that involves fighting giant robots in Shadow-of-the-colossus style as well as FPS? Why not a game set in an abandoned but heavily trapped environment where destructibility is a key game mechanic?
  - TeMPOraL 14y ago
    There was Portal. And then Portal 2. And also Mirror's Edge. And... that's about it? sigh
- mynameishere 14y ago
  You want boring? http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81JSMr%2BIR6L._SL1500_.jpg http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81JSMr%2BIR6L._SL1500_... But seriously, there's almost an absurd variety of games out there. No one has to play violent games. One problem is that multiplayer doesn't work well in most other genres.
inopinatus 14y ago
Actually the TL;DR is even shorter: "I won't work on FPSs". If you read it closely you'll see that he talks about someone who shielded his children from violent computer games, then he says that he'll never work a FPS again citing "ethical reasons", but never produces any kind of argument connecting these two points, or stating what those ethical reasons actually are. I know it's just a blog post and all but I saw the length of the text and was therefore hoping for a more reasoned discussion rather than anonymous anecdote and soul-searching. He seems rather hung up on "protecting children" from something, although what outcome he is afraid of is entirely unstated. I was not shielded from the horrors of the world as a child so it is unclear to me what has changed in the last twenty years, or what makes, specifically, the first-person-shooter genre such a travesty in his eyes.
- scott_s 14y ago
  I was similarly confused. I think I know what his reason is, but he never explicitly stated it. I may not even disagree with his reasons, but it's difficult to know for sure since he never actually stated those reasons. He only alluded to something that caused him to think of those reasons.
- Groxx 14y ago
  Yeah, it's reading between the lines. But the story is about how a father wouldn't explain the truth about the game, and I got a fairly strong sense of guilt from the article as a whole. I read that as 1 + 1 = 2 in the absence of anything explicit, since why else include it?

by Groxx 14y ago

TillE 14y ago

> it's not just FPSes Quite right. Violence is the simplest form of human conflict, the one we can most easily adapt to games. Even chess is an abstraction of war strategy. But personally, I'm much more OK with fairly abstract strategy games than I am with games that shove a gun in your hands and shower you with blood. It's exhausting. I have no problem with those games existing on the market, I'm just so very tired of the fact that nearly every big-budget game centers on shooting people in the face. Or stabbing them. If nothing else, I've been doing that in videogames for the past 20 years now (since Wolf3d and Doom), and it's getting boring.

pms 14y ago
Well, it is damn boring.
- __david__ 14y ago
  For you, maybe. Not everyone holds that opinion.
  - pms 14y ago
    I realize :)
anigbrowl 14y ago
If nothing else, I've been doing that in videogames for the past 20 years now (since Wolf3d and Doom), and it's getting boring. I've had this problem too for the last several years. I like 3d, and I like hyper-realistic game environments, and I like science fiction. But I am sick to the back teeth of gore, and of being confronted by hideous mutants/ zombies/ creatures that I'm supposed to splatter all over the walls. I play games far less than I used to because I'm tired of this horror element. What gets me is that even within these genre conventions, there seem to be very few new ideas. How come I don't see survival-horror games based around super-powered alien insects that can walk on the ceiling? Why isn't there a Terminator game that involves fighting giant robots in Shadow-of-the-colossus style as well as FPS? Why not a game set in an abandoned but heavily trapped environment where destructibility is a key game mechanic?
- TeMPOraL 14y ago
  There was Portal. And then Portal 2. And also Mirror's Edge. And... that's about it? sigh
mynameishere 14y ago
You want boring? http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81JSMr%2BIR6L._SL1500_.jpg http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81JSMr%2BIR6L._SL1500_... But seriously, there's almost an absurd variety of games out there. No one has to play violent games. One problem is that multiplayer doesn't work well in most other genres.

inopinatus 14y ago

Actually the TL;DR is even shorter: "I won't work on FPSs". If you read it closely you'll see that he talks about someone who shielded his children from violent computer games, then he says that he'll never work a FPS again citing "ethical reasons", but never produces any kind of argument connecting these two points, or stating what those ethical reasons actually are. I know it's just a blog post and all but I saw the length of the text and was therefore hoping for a more reasoned discussion rather than anonymous anecdote and soul-searching. He seems rather hung up on "protecting children" from something, although what outcome he is afraid of is entirely unstated. I was not shielded from the horrors of the world as a child so it is unclear to me what has changed in the last twenty years, or what makes, specifically, the first-person-shooter genre such a travesty in his eyes.

scott_s 14y ago
I was similarly confused. I think I know what his reason is, but he never explicitly stated it. I may not even disagree with his reasons, but it's difficult to know for sure since he never actually stated those reasons. He only alluded to something that caused him to think of those reasons.
Groxx 14y ago
Yeah, it's reading between the lines. But the story is about how a father wouldn't explain the truth about the game, and I got a fairly strong sense of guilt from the article as a whole. I read that as 1 + 1 = 2 in the absence of anything explicit, since why else include it?