My name is Robert Farago and I’m a video game addict. Back in the day, I’d smoke a joint (without inhaling), down a Diet Coke and hit the arcade. I’d play Battlezone or Bezerk until I ran out of quarters or the munchies enforced Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. When shoot-’em-ups migrated to consoles, it was bad. It’s one day at a time now. I fill my time by writing for TTAG, single-parenting a ten-year-old, mentoring a brace of Schnauzers and pressing NFW on a ten match.com profiles per day. OK, I fell off the gaming wagon for a few weeks a while back . . .

Sniper Elite V2. It was a timesuck in the sense that a black hole has a negative effect on gravity. But I’m clean now man, I swear. I can look at new gun game without twitching fingers. I haven’t fired-up the PS3 since my eldest had a major Jones for Red Dead Redemption. Genetics. What are you going to do? What I’m not going to do is play gun games all day. And night.

Some of that lack of temptation’s down to the violence in shooting games. Don’t get me wrong: a shooting game without violence is like dickless porn. (If you don’t know what that is you can thank the Internet.) And I’m all about the First Amendment; it’s not for me to tell a game designer where to draw the line (so to speak) on ballistic gore. And I don’t think violent video games lead to real world violence. Much.

But some of today’s gun games are so nihilistic, so blood-soaked that they give me the creeps. This particular game, Hotline Miami, is one of those. The bit where the guy gets chainsawed to death? It doesn’t strike me as clever or funny or challenging or sick in an ironic, post-modern way. It’s just sick. Period. I know: there’s plenty of plot in the game. For lack of a better term, it’s crazy sh*t. Not that I’d know from playing it.

Which means I’ve got no business criticizing it. So I’ll toss this one to TTAG readers who are still gun game addicts. I mean, aficionados. Are [some of] today’s gun games too violent? Does that question even mean anything anymore?

79 Responses to Question of the Day: Are Gun Games Too Violent or What?

  1. By and large, no. There are a few out there, but there always have been and will be until big brother tells us it’s not good for us.

    The Soldier of Fortune series was pretty serious, and SoF2 even included “funny” little animations where “people” you shot in the balls would grab their crotch, scream, and hop around. I’ve an avid player of first-person shooters but I have never personally been a huge fan of over-the-top gore. In fact, as little blood as possible is great with me. It doesn’t lend anything to the game for me.

    • I remember the SoF games. From a technical standpoint it was awesome that the game registers hits differently depending on which area of the body they occur, with some forty different detection areas (instead of Counterstrike, which had 3 or so). Being able to literally shoot out somebody’s intestines was interesting for about two minutes though and the ultimate problem with the SoF games is that the gameplay just kind of sucked.

      Edit: I feel that hit detection is crucial in games like this especially for multiplayer, and I feel blood is necessary so the player can tell if they hit the target or not.

  2. Anyone who claims that video games are the problem with school violence (looking at you Lapierre) are JUST as bad as the Brady Campaign or MDA. Just like how millions use guns and never hurt anybody, millions play video games and never hurt anybody.

    As far as too violent, nope. GTA is pretty violent and I started playing that in 4th grade, and I turned out OK.

    • Agreed. It saddened me to find that Wayne was willing to throw the First amendment under the bus to save the Second.

      It’s why I did not renew my NRA membership, and will not.

      • So what other pro-2A group did you divert your money too? What did that other group do to torpedo the gun grabber legislative attempt last spring?

      • That’s just cutting off your nose to spite your face. Logically, was Wayne correct? Of course not. It’s just a game, any game, and they’re even less relevant than guns themselves. Still.

        Nevertheless, Sandy Hook was a horrific crime and the NRA was already taking heat (including on TTAG, by the way) for taking too long to respond. Think about that: the overheated emotions of those days were hounding the NRA for the mere timing of their response. What chance did the substance of their response have of being regarded without extreme criticism?

        We hear time and time again how the anti’s exploit emotions to serve their purposes. Why? Because it works. The NRA needed to give the grieving hordes groping for answers some kind of bad guy. The video games could take the abuse. Nobody’s going to shut them down. First, because legally the 1st amendment gets more protection than any other. Second, because politically the Democrats’ allies in the entertainment industry wouldn’t stand for action against them, as music and movies would be swept up in any such crackdown, too. So Wayne gave them the video games to blunt the assault and buy time.

        Wayne new nothing would happen and he was right. It just gave the overwrought, over reacting crowd something mushy to get gummed up in while emotions cooled and serious measures were weighed.

        Speaking of which, one of those measures was expansion of firearms freedom, as Wayne argued was necessary to combat criminal violence. Since then, we’ve seen some nice court rulings in California, a nice new law in Georgia, and even today, a NM community college arming their campus security. Many of these and similar outcomes are directly impacted or at least influenced by the NRA’s work. Obviously, you’re free to join or not, as you wish. That’s your call. Down in the day-to-day trenches fighting for firearms freedom, there’s not much call for anyone on their high horse, anyway.

      • I wish I’d seen your comment earlier, I’d have warned you. The NRA proponents here really aren’t any better than the disarmament crowd.

        “But but but, the NRA has to do something… ANYTHING! It’s for the children!”

        If you aren’t on board with that and pouring money into an organization that doesn’t really represent you, you’re part of the problem not the solution. Ah, the hive mind…

        • I don’t know any family, or even any couple, whose members are in 100% agreement on every issue. Hell, any given person is often struggling with several major issues at any given time; sometimes lasting a lifetime. The NRA has some five million members. The firearms owning community may be another hundred million people. It’s expected that there may be the occasional disagreement over strategies, priorities and tactics from time to time, or all of the time.

          What is a fact, which nobody can deny, is that the NRA has done more to support, defend and expand firearms freedoms in this country than any other individual or organization since the Framers. If you can do better, then please do. You say you have a real solution? Well, you know…….we all want to hear the plan….

  3. The bloodiest game I ever played was the latest Mortal Kombat. No guns at all in it, but gore? Does the phrase “blood explosion extraordinaire” mean anything to you?

    Clearly, this is something that people want. So if that’s what they want, let ’em have it.

  4. A little off topic, but when I played Red Dead Redemption, there were some things that drove me crazy. One of the rifles you get earlier on is a Trapdoor Springfield. Every time I fired it, I would instinctively hit the reload button, because in real life it is a single shot rifle. I finally notice that the game version of the Springfield held four rounds. That one thing was extremely annoying to me. So much so, that I would still reload after every shot because firing a Trapdoor Springfield more than once without reloading just didn’t feel right at all.

    • Rockstar is terrible with guns, they are based in Great Britain so you can’t blame them really.

      (In GTA V they got a bit better.)

      • Actually Rockstar Games is based in New York. The lead team behind GTA V is actually based in Scotland, but Rockstar London helped collaborate. The company that own them, Take-Two Interactive, is also based in New York though their international headquarters are based in Windsor, England.

      • Agreed. I just beat Max Payne 3, and every time I saw Max or a bad guy draw a 1911 with the hammer down, I died a little on the inside.

    • That’s pretty funny. You should’ve mentioned that on yesterday’s “You know you’re a gun nut if…” Would seem a good fit.

      Closest account I have of my own was just yesterday, too. I’m not a fan of the show “South Park”, but someone showed me a clip from an episode regarding hunting and government restrictions on firearms. One character went deer hunting wielding what appeared to be some kind of giant RPG, which he described as a “47 gauge”; implying that the larger the gauge, the bigger the barrel, gun, whatever. Seems intuitive, but that would actually be the opposite of what gauge means, at least with shotguns, anyway. Made me laugh at the clip, but not how they intended.

  5. It totally depends on who is consuming it. You, a grown man, playing any given first person shooter game, can (hopefully) easily differentiate between the fantasy of the game on the screen, and the reality of the world you’re living in. An elementary school child? For many, not so much.

    As to the arguments on both sides of the aisle, where one says these games cause violence, and one side says it has no effect, they’re both wrong.

    They do not *cause* violence, but they *do* have an effect on young consumers in the sense that it *normalizes* violence in their minds. And for those who are incapable of differentiating between the games they play and what’s going on in their real life, that is when and where it often becomes a problem.

    As for the First Amendment argument, these game producers obviously have every right to produce and market whatever games they want. The burden should fall on the parents of these young children to decide whether or not to expose them to that level of violence at a given age. Unfortunately, most simply don’t care.

    • I don’t believe the age matter so much as the amount of time spent playing games. If the only thing a kid does is play violent video games for 4 hours or more a day, you have a problem as a parent — otherwise, it does not matter much — I believe it is a volume thing versus violence — even a little person knows the difference between real and fantasy.

      I think any person who only experience is any specific social vice (sex, drugs, alcohol, violence) or economic issues (urban blight, broken families, poverty) becomes distorted over time if that is the only thing they know or have ever known.

      • I beg to differ. Children do not have the same mental capacity in a whole slough of ways that adults do. Having a six or seven year old child playing games like GTA or any other violent game for that matter, or watching violent movies or TV shows, predisposes them to a “violence is normal” mindset. Which can, and does, cause problems. No, they won’t all grow up to be mass murderers. But it’s rarely the children whose parents didn’t allow video games in the house who are the bullies at school.

      • I’ll agree to the quantity vs quality argument. I started playing video games before I was 10 (rarely play anymore, guns fill that role in my life now) and watched violent movies and TV shows way before then. I turned out okay, and very immune to violence in entertainment. Although, I am still sensitive to violence IRL. I understand that it is sometimes necessary to do violent acts for the greater good, such as shooting someone trying to harm your loved ones, but I hope I never have to witness it. Kids are smarter than anyone gives them credit for, myself included. I have caught myself thinking that some kids are too young for something, only to realize that I did/had that thing when I was their age.

        All that aside, the game trailer at the top of the post looks interesting (minus the chainsaw. Too vulnerable and slow).

        • But that’s the entire point. Whether or not it “normalizes” a children’s mind to accept violence in movies or videos games is irrelevant because neither of these forms of media depict reality. As long as a child is able to differentiate the real world from the virtual world/big screen, they can play violent games until doomsday without going out into society and killing someone just because they saw it happen in a game or movie.

          I personally blame bad parenting. Spend time to teach them about the real world instead of sitting them in front of a game console all day.

        • I agree with Ben. It’s bad parenting if you don’t know your child well enough to know if they are mature and sane enough to play violent video games. The type of kid who shouldn’t be playing them should be obvious to any parent paying attention. Games are rated by everyone, teen and mature. These are words that, to me, describe character more than age. The guvmint needs to stay out of matters that really only concern the parents.

    • I agree with most of what you said. I feel that people who are prone to violence will seek out violent movies and video games in order to get their fill. Do all those people take that “leap” to homicide? No; most/almost all do not. Should those people that never cross that line (or those that are just entertained by those games and movies) be punished because of the actions of a few? Absolutely not!

      As far as the kid thing goes, I think that when a person is bombarded with enough material, they become desensitized to that material. Whether it is violence, sex, politics, etc… Humans are social creatures. Most people that aren’t strong in their convictions are easily influenced by “group think”. Most kids are influenced by their parents opinions and the opinions of those in positions of authority (teachers, clergy, older siblings, etc). Those people could, inadvertently, give their “permission” by not caring what their kids watch/do. The thought of “Well, Mom and Dad don’t care, so it must not be a big deal” is not a stretch if you think back to when you were a kid.

      There is so much to this conversation that has been politicized (just like guns), that the object or entertainment material is blamed instead of focusing on why the events that spark these conversations happen. The conversation of what games they played or what weapon(s) were used is part of the outcome, not the origin.

      • “Violent video games don’t make our children raging hate monsters. Lag does. So buy that super high-speed internet connection. DO IT FOR THE CHILDREN.”

        *This advertisement was brought to you by our friends at AT&T*

  6. Asking if gun games are too violent is like asking if p0rn has too much sex. Violence is the whole point of gun games, and a gun game without lots of violence is no better than a dry hump.

  7. And what’s wrong with using a chainsaw? It was always one of my favs to get all the way back on the DOOM series! Fire that badboy up for some CQC! And how many times did I pull the spine out of somebody in Mortal Combat? And you know how homicidal I am? Not at all, I spend 9+ hours a day in a cloth cover cubicle, love my family, can’t wait to scratch my dogs’ head at the end of the day and go fishing in the pond on the farm. It’s just a game, some good, some bad, some just campy in their violence.

  8. It’s not the video game per se, it’s those who have a mental condition that causes them to emulate the actions carried out in the game.

    • The fact that those acts exist in a video game at all is completely coincidence. People with mental problems were killing other people long before pong came out (with all of its’ gore).

  9. The downside of games is my kid would rather shoot guns in a game because he doesn’t have to clean them. He likes to shoot real guns, he likes to take them apart and put them back together- but clean them, that just makes the whole deal not worth it to him.

  10. Most of the games I play for the story. I love a good story,like Battle Field, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, SW: Knights of the Old Republic, Splinter Cell Black list, Tomb Raider, Saints Row for example.

    There are some games that got weird and can no longer enjoy (MGS2, a rollerskating obese midget in a bomb suit anyone?)

    I dont play games just for the sheer violence, thats not fun, I play them because they have certain aspects I like such as the characters, gameplay style, and of course a good story.

    • Most of the games I play for the story.

      That’s what old guys say about why they read Playboy back in the day. For the stories.

      Guess what? They lie.

      • I’ll agree with the OP. Mass Effect sucked me in like a trance for 2-3 weeks at the beginning of the year. Not because of the violence, but because I had to know what happens next. The guns & shooting brought me in, but I logged 50+ hours in a week because I needed to know what happened next.

        • I’ll also agree with OP. Bioshock sucked me in. Really good game. Bioshock infinite- despite similar gameplay- simply hasn’t sucked me in.

          It’s not just about ‘shooting bad guys’ for me.

      • Story is what does Iit for me as well. I don’t do multiplayer and rapid twitch or grind it out gameplay just wears me out. But tell me a good story and I’m with you for hours on end.

        I got completely drawn in to The Last of Us, and its DLC, Left Behind. Beautiful stories, exquisitely told.

  11. Does it matter the age of the person playing the game? I recently saw a five year old blasting the hell out of rival combatants – all in bloody high definition detail – and he expressed such glee over each kill, I found it kind of chilling.

  12. The computer generated gore has never attracted me. Games which are over the top with violence do not attract me either. I see younger people playing those types of games without and recognition of time or anything else around them. But all of that should be under parental and personal control, not the gov’ment.

  13. The truth is, it’s not really [gun] violence at issue.

    Some people can’t differentiate between reality and fantasy very well, and the lines can sometimes get a little blurred. That’s not the full extent, either, though.

    By and large, people who pursue mass-casualty violence in real life are usually doing so to feel like they’re regaining control over their lives; it’s often a desperate, twisted way to right wrongs, to dispense justice that they feel will never come through using ‘the system,’ or to otherwise prove they’re in control of their situation. Because violence without consequence is often used as part of a plot progression or to solve a particular problem in popular media, sick people can view it as a viable solution to working through their problems. ‘Kill the bad guys, happily ever after’ is the summarized plot line of so many movies, TV shows, games, and (to a lesser extent) books, that some people who aren’t wired quite right think of it as the eventual solution rather than some other, more realistic and logical answer.

  14. My question in response would be, too violent for what? Young children, certainly. There’s no good reason children should be exposed to violence or any other concept that they are not intellectually prepared to process appropriately. Adults? Maybe, maybe not. Consenting adults and all that. To me the problem isn’t one of violence in the game, it’s a lack of context to interpret what you are seeing. If, as a child, all you see is continual horrific violence, while it may not induce someone to violence, certainly skews their views of it. The context is important, and for many kids there is no context because their parents cannot or will not provide it.

  15. Life is violent, Mother Nature is a brutal bitch, plain and simple.

    Watch some Nat Geo if you don’t understand what I mean.

    And, anyone talking about video games being too violent needs to get real. Because guess what, you can find the same violence in the real world, people kill each in real life. And, it’s been that way since way before video games, I assure you.

    I will say that I think video games makes kids weaker, but not emotionally, just mentally and physically. Video games give a false sense of accomplishment (why play football, you can just play madden and be a Super Bowl champ) and makes kids sit on their asses more.

  16. “Let the words of my mouth and the meditations of my heart be acceptable in thy sight . . . .” An idea with giving some thought to.

    • +1. I am ancient and I don’t play any games beyond the non-electronic versions of Scrabble, Monopoly, checkers, etc. Hence, I am not qualified to render an opinion in re computer game violence. I do know, however, that there are only 24 hours in a day and that too many Americans spend far too much time in worthless pursuits. Ignorance is as great an enemy to our freedoms as the anti-gunners are. There are ESPN addicts who know what brand of glove every benchwarming pitcher in MLB wears, but who don’t know what the 2nd (or any) Amendment says. Most college students and recent graduates have never read anything by Cicero, Edmund Burke, John Adams, etc. and most of them don’t even know who they are. If you want to be useful in the fight for freedom read the books that form the foundation of our civilization. Start with the Bible and move forward from there.

      • I refuse to believe that people who say crap like that have no hobbies or pastimes at all, and just spend their whole day with their nose buried in The Federalist Papers or the work of Alexis de Toqueville.

        Step off the pedestal and get over yourself, Socrates. Whatever you do to unwind is a unproductive waste of time, too; do you care, though? More importantly: should you care, or do you not owe anyone an explanation for why you enjoy the things you do? Because I certainly don’t owe you one.

  17. Nothing is too anything as an absolute. Now some things may be too something for some people but that’s for themselves or their guardians to decide for themselves or those in their charge. No, government is not the people’s guardian.

  18. My buddies and I played every version of “Postal” ever made and a few other gun games and not a one of us has ever been arrested or accused of any crimes and meet weekly for range time.

    It is IMO not about violence in any games it is about ones upbringing and education.

    If you grow up being taught right from wrong and are sufficiently educated how it all works there should be no problem no matter the game.

  19. “are today’s gun games too violent?”

    Nope. You’ve always had a few that have tried to push the limits by being excessively violent, grotesque for shock value or notoriety. Mortal Combat is one that comes to mind for gore with the spine pull finish move. Gears of War is one of the more recent highly popular series that was down right brutal with the multiple weapon specific executions and had a very high gore factor. ABttlefield and COD have minimal gore although COD:W@W did try the ultra realistic high gore route.

    Do these types of games negatively impact certain individuals, I’m sure they do. However, the vast majority of people that play them recognize them as a form of entertainment and detached from reality.

  20. I don’t really play videogames for the action (unless it is Battlefield over the internet or Ace Combat:Assault Horizon) but because I want to hear a good story and explore an interesting world. In that regard Red Dead Redemption (which is for the PS3/Xbox 360 BTW) is a clear winner. I think I have completed it 2-4 times + equally many times the Undead Nightmare expansion.

    I am not a fan of gore, seen way too much of that in reality. Besides in some games they put in too much gore which makes you wonder whether your enemies are sacks filled with ketchup. I don’t mind blood/gore if it is done well (blood gushing if you stab someone in the neck for instance but not if you shoot them in the gut) or appropriately (enemies don’t get drenched in blood when shooting them).

  21. For children I care about the context more than the action. So, any child of mine can play Medal of Honor (you are a WWII GI) but not Grand Theft Auto (you become a crime lord). Of course there will be some age differentiation but I care less about violence being a part- or even the crux- of a game. I care about why they use it. Killing is not morally wrong- murder is.

    Are you shooting civilians to get a kill count? Not in my household. Are you defending yourself while doing something else? As in Bioshock two where you are trying to rescue your daughter, then we can talk.

    • I find the whole “context” bit funny. Almost all GTA games show how shitty it is to do crime. San Andreas, Vice City, GTA IV all showed how that kinda life destroys you, goes out over your family and friends and that in the end you wind up at the top alone. Kinda like Scarface (the movie), you reach the top, you are alone there and in the end someone shoots you to reach the top just like you did earlier.

      Seriously, play through GTA IVs story and tell me with a straight face that it glorifies crime.

      I will admit that we share the same line of thought: “killing is not morally wrong – murder is”.

      • Not that it glorifies crime- but that player models it during gameplay and that’s not something I want a child or young teen doing.

        For adults? Hey, go ahead and enjoy. I do tend to like grittier entertainment with following things out- these are the consequences of these actions. Actually this is a good statement like that about the latest GTA http://grantland.com/features/tom-bissell-writes-letter-niko-bellic-grand-theft-auto-v/

        I think that’s important in entertainment in general. My question is, are 14 year olds drawing that lesson? Or do they get stuck on how it was amusing it was to go to a strip club? I know it’s M, and they can’t buy it, but plenty play it.

        For me it boils down to- until they are at least older teens- I want them modelling heroic action. Not plumbing the gritty depths of Anti-heros. Not yet.

  22. I’ve been playing games since a kid, the first rated M game I played was probably Team Fortress though the one that I really got into was Counter Strike. You don’t see me running around shooting up people people I recognize and can differentiate reality from virtual reality. I think its how one is raised and if the people especially the parents keep them in check until they are mature enough to differentiate fact from fantasy.

  23. I never got into video games. I’m old. My oldest son did and turned out great. My 36year old not so much. A lot depends on parents and peers. I understand ragging on the NRA. I support the NRA but banning video games isn’t the answer. We’re between a rock & a hard place.

  24. No. If a game truly was too violent (i.e. tasteless and repugnant), it wouldn’t be a commercial success. Game companies are business like any other, they can’t sell a product that alienates their customers. The game industry has a voluntary rating system just like the Motion Picture industry that prevents minors from buying “violent” video games. Parents are still buy the latest “M” rating games in the millions for their children. GTA 5 made $1B in sales in three days last year.

  25. I’m going to cast my vote for ‘no’. I’m a long time gamer and I can’t say it’s made me more violent. I can say the same of all my friends who game as well. This seems to be the case by and large. After all these games are incredibly popular yet it’s very rare than and violence linked to these games. And when it does happen it ALWAYS comes back that the person that committed the crime was always mentally ill.

  26. No, imo games in general are way less violent than they were in the old days. I remember when enemies used to explode into a cloud of gore when you shot them enough. If a major big budget game with that kind of gore were released nowadays the “moms” groups would have a collective aneurysm.

    • Glad to see your cryo-pod has finally thawed. Welcome back.

      You might want to sit down for this, because a lot of things have happened since you were frozen back in 1996…

  27. Hotline Miami is no different than Night Trap in the 90s when Leiberdouche started his crusade against games.

    There is an underlying human psychology issue we keep ignoring here. Video games 400 years ago a.k.a. tribal warfare.

  28. My buddy and I balance our vid playing with real life stuff. We are in our 40’s, fish, coach youth sports, collect and rebuild cool, old Coleman lanterns (pre-1964), spend a tons of time in the woods. We also drink grape Zipfizz and Vodka (we call it a Zipper) and stay up too late playing vids once every couple weeks.

    Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, Rainbow 6. We like the earlier Medal of Honor series for their early WW2 weapons and the later games for their better graphics.

      • The tactical shooter genre, especially Tom Clancy, are the best in my opinion. Much more realistic than running around shooting full-auto on CoD games.

  29. While I would agree with RF that there is often far too much violence in many video games, oddly it is not typically focus around guns. So, calling out the typical FPS is probably a bit too much.

    Now speaking as a gamer (though much less than in my younger days) my biggest problem is that I’m right eye dominant but left handed. In the old AWSD keyboard days that wasn’t a problem, but I’m really getting annoyed playing things like CoD or MoH on the Wii with my son. It really throws off the aim having to have the “trigger” in the wrong hand. I’m seriously thinking of getting one of the CTG rifle stocks so I can use a somewhat more natural shooting approach and kick his butt.

  30. SOF and SOF2 use the QuakeIII engine which is difficult to get working on newer computers.

    As a long-time observer of computer and video games, I don’t think they have an adverse effect on most people. There will be exceptions. The games are more about exploring environments, solving puzzles, and protecting yourself when attacked. Creating the atmosphere for the immersion is a plus, but some would make you really immersed.

    My current most-played game is Call Of Duty Black Ops II Zombies. I haven’t really bothered with the main campaign. But my second most-played game is the remakes of the Close Combat strategy games. My son watches me play the zombies game, and he knows the zombies are monsters.

    The chainsaw scene in Miami Hotline is probably a homage to a similar scene in the movie Scarface.

  31. No.

    Video games do not cause violence. There’s not even any concrete evidence that any desensitization is going on. Are there individuals out there that can’t differentiate between reality and media? Sure. Doesn’t mean that the rest of us should be punished for their misdeeds. Add that to the fact there are plenty of unbalanced people that play these violent vidya games and have no inclination to cause harm.

    Quit blame-shifting and put all your energy into pinning the violence problem where it really belongs: upon the heads and headstones of the Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex. They are the ones enabling the mass slaughter of innocents. It has always been that way and it forever shall be.

  32. I can think of maybe one or two that are too violent for me, but that’s an individual choice everyone makes for themselves. If the story is worth it, I may keep playing through it for the story, same as with movies.

  33. no more sick and sadistic than video games have ever been plus the game is fun as hell its like a puzzle of death

  34. I’m all for violence in video games. If someone plays, say, Sniper Elite V2, and sees through the X-Ray Kill Cam what a bullet can do to someone, then they’re going to appreciate how dangerous a gun is. They’ll realise guns are not harmless toys. And also, violent video games are good for stress management. I came back from school one day, and I’d had a bad day. I was bullied, punched, punched back. I was really angry. So I popped on some CoD, shot the ever-loving f**k out of some enemies, and the stress disappeared with every massively incorrectly modelled gun-shot. I’m all for it. If it means they take their anger out on the enemies in-game rather than go out on a spree shoot, then it must be a good thing, right guys?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *