Well in TV not only kill-movies sell. Dramas, comedies, adventure etc sells as well. So why is gaming almost exclusively about killing?
Go on, play an interactive comedy where the same joke is told 100000x to keep people playing. Dramas? boring. Adventure? Limiting without some type of enemy. Love stories? There are plenty of adult games out there.
games built around violence sells the most and so, that is what is being made the most.
Consumer demand drives the market. The very reason why I get pissed when people complain about how the MMO genre is bogged down with clones yet the very same people are still going to go out and buy Wildstar and TESO just because its a new title and they have no MMO home. Just plain madness, the clones wont end with so many people buying the same crap, yet still turn around and complain about it.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
The desire for realism in entertainment has been going on since the beginning. Technology has simply advanced to the point in which it is virtually realistic. This goes for film, print, stage and video games. It's a huge assumption that there is anything sinister about this. Stories have involved gore from the beginning of recorded history. This is nothing new and says nothing of the state of our society, but simply the state of current technology that now allows the expression of those stories in a more realistic manner.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
Because the games you have chosen to play are focused on those things.
Don't like them anymore? Go play games that aren't focused on digital violence. Mahjong (the real one, not the tile matching games that use mahjong tiles), chess, checkers, monopoly, poker, Bejeweled, hidden item search games, Farmville, Scrabble, dominoes.
There are thousands of games out there that aren't focused on digital violence but are still focused on competition.
There are games whose primary attraction is how much blood and gore they can throw up on your monitor. Do what I do. Don't play them.
That misses a little bit the point.
First, a lot of the 100% non-violent games are either super casual (like Mahjong or Farmville) and not really interesting for me as gamer or just too trashy/primitive (like some of the "indie" or kickstarter games).
Second, there are some cool 100% non violent games, adventures (Nancy Drew) or simulations (Sims, Sim City), but they are not entirely fulfilling just to play them alone.
Third, I do want adventure and even killing, but I don't want the adventure JUST be a long tunnel leading me from one excessive, alternative-less killing spree to the next! Isn't is imaginable to have a balance? Again, take Skyrim. I do lots of killing in Skyrim, but I never felt it was revolving around it.
Fourth, it doesn't help me either, if gorey killer-spree games (like Ryse of Rome or FarCry) and such get tons of money poured into it, and balanced games (no pacifist games!) are getting less and less, at least by the big studios and hence the big money. I do not wish pacifism in games. I want OPTIONS how to solve a crisis, so I CAN chose to gun all down as brutal as possible, but I also CAN chose 1-2-3-4 other ways. Sneak. Persuade. Blackmail. Anything else but tunnels of ever more gore as the ONLY option. Take System Shock. Often I had a lot of choices how to proceed, despite the game was combat focussed, combat wasn't ALL I could do. I could deactivate and hack cameras and computers. I could sneak.
So by just saying "don't play them", is cutting the entire issue a few levels too short, IMVPO.
It's similar as with my love for Batman comics. They have become almost unreadably violent. Cut off faces and all. In detail. I don't want to read other comics. Like suddenly reading Archie comics or what. I WANT Batman, but I don't want it so bloody gorey I puke out my supper! So just "look at something else" really isn't the point.
You also missed a big part of his point. The Fantasy genre has always been rooted in heroic deeds, it's not senseless violence, you're supposed to be protecting your lands or saving the world. That's simply a staple of the genre. If you're looking for less violence andor killing, the fantasy genre isn't the place you're going to find it.
There are plenty of other genre's that are suited for what you're looking for, your best bet is in more Sim like games. If you're looking for a role to play that isn't a violent one, look to the more virtual world style of design. Space sims, and the like are the most abundant of these types of games. However, if you're entering into a multi-player version of this, expect to see violence, as well as expect to be a victim of violent actions. That is the sole nature of games that give you options as well as focus on virtual worlds, not everyone in a world is the nice guy.
Another point of note on this topic is that games have tried this non violent approach to MMO design, ATTITD, as well as another larger budget game, I can't quite place the name of at this time. It was cell shaded, that much I remember. Neither ever did so well; the latter was rather short lived, granted ATITD is low budget and that may or may not have determined it's success for it.
TL'DR Look to genre's other than high fantasy, horror, Comical violence, etc... IF you're looking for roles to play that are "non-violent".
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The "Balanced" Games are out there Elikal, you just have to look. It is just these games will most likely be single player games. You can't expect to put players together in the same room and not kill each other in video games, but there are still multiplayer games that have no violence.
Rain - Ps3 - single player
minecraft - Multiplayer building game
Gary's mod - multiplayer building game
Any racing game and any sports games - they have multiplayer
So there are non violent games you can play with friends and have fun. However from what you been saying is that you want a multiplayer game that has killing but it is not the only option. No such thing, don't think it will ever exist. The very moment there is any kind of killing in a multiplayer game, the game will be about killing each other. Or else what would it be about? Hugging each other? You can make a multiplayer game that has non violent distractions, but most of the time that is crafting and what are you crafting? a weapon to better your killing. Building? Building a bunk or house that will later be invaded. A game like DayZ that gives you the option to work together or kill each other and ALWAYS results in killing each other. I don't think it is possible to make a multiplayer game that gives you the option to not mass kill each other. That game does sound boring too.
Well in TV not only kill-movies sell. Dramas, comedies, adventure etc sells as well. So why is gaming almost exclusively about killing?
Go on, play an interactive comedy where the same joke is told 100000x to keep people playing. Dramas? boring. Adventure? Limiting without some type of enemy. Love stories? There are plenty of adult games out there.
games built around violence sells the most and so, that is what is being made the most.
Consumer demand drives the market. The very reason why I get pissed when people complain about how the MMO genre is bogged down with clones yet the very same people are still going to go out and buy Wildstar and TESO just because its a new title and they have no MMO home. Just plain madness, the clones wont end with so many people buying the same crap, yet still turn around and complain about it.
The other thing about TV, or Movies/Films in general, is that its also the quality that sells, you can shove as much graphic violence and special effects into a film as you like, but there's absolutely no guarantee it will sell, there have been more than a few epic fail movies lately that fall into that category.
But getting back to MMO's i'd say that trying to infer the games are a hotbed of violence is entirely fallacious, players do not run around attacking things in a fit of anger, there is no anger, its just a game, to have 'violence' there would have to be violent intent, and there isnt any, although i can imagine there are a few people who have anger issues that might feel otherwise, but for most, there is none.
But getting back to MMO's i'd say that trying to infer the games are a hotbed of violence is entirely fallacious, players do not run around attacking things in a fit of anger, there is no anger, its just a game, to have 'violence' there would have to be violent intent.
Violence is an act, not an intent.
You can have a smile on your face and be happy and walk up to someone and punch them in the face and be committing an ACT of violence.
Violence: the intentional use of physical force or power threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
It's not really a philosophical view and more of a scientific one. Fear keeps us in check. Our advancements all come from fear. Weapons, Healthcare, sanitation, civics, religion, business (profit)....etc all developed over time because of fear.
So for people to do the right thing even without fear, yes that is true. Upbringing plays an important factor. But without a purely controlled state, removing free will, I would not chance it. The earth and conflicts all over it of man and animal have proven time and again people and animals will make the harshest and most vicious of decisions to try and remove the fear that is invading their lives.
Fight or flight is ingrained in all animals. This was around long before conscious thought, and without some real DNA manipulation, isn't going away any time soon.
I don't think fear is the only motivator. Sure it's important but do you really think all of human advances have come about just because someone was afraid of something? I don't. Wild animals don't have a choice about acting on their instincts but humans do. We have free will. We can learn from our mistakes and change our behavior. Of course people still do horrible and stupid things all the time but there is always hope for progress. Just compare western society now with what it was in the Dark Ages. It's far from perfect but things have got a lot better in so many ways.
Originally posted by FrodoFragins I'm sure there are hello kitty like games for you to play if you want.
Wow. I totally didn't see that answer coming.
You probably shouldn't feed the trolls, lest they multiply. However, Hello Kitty Online itself isn't the best example of what the thread is about, since HKO does in fact have combat, even though it's not the main focus.
Originally posted by Avarix I was just discussing this with a friend about a different genre, fantasy novels. I was looking for one to read and he listed all the current popular ones like A Song of Fire and Ice. I now refer to these as shock fantasy. Same with shows like Walking Dead. They are insanely popular but I have no interest in them. Not sure if it's because I am older or what, I simply don't find the constant death and torture of main characters as entertaining. I don't see this going away though, quite the opposite. I think this is going to get a lot worse because of how popular this type of thing currently is.
I don't think, in the case of A Song of Ice and Fire or The Walking Dead, that the "constant death and torture" is "entertaining" in the sense of giddy enthusiasm but in the sense that it draws people in with high stakes and extremely serious emotional weight. The suffering of fictional characters practically forces us to empathize with them.
Favorites: EQ, EVE | Playing: None. Mostly VR and strategy | Anticipating: CU, Pantheon
This isn't rant, more a concerned comment for a long year gamer about what I feel is the current trend in MMOs and single player games: Focussing all around killing, and showing it in ever greater gorey detail. I just begin to feel awkward about it, so I wanted to share my thoughts about it.
Here is my new VBlog about it.
Online gaming initially took pen and paper gaming (Advanced Dungeons and Dragons, et al.) to the next level. This game was filled with drama...the kind that involved a lot of death, romance, and all out adventuring. The term RPG was birthed in that concept and died shortly after 2004...Role Playing by default meant we were trying to emulate how people would live in a fantasy setting...and yes...more death followed.
There's also the logic that gamers are meant to be characters in a novel setting - isn't that what all these games really try to do is to emulate The Lord of the Rings novels in some fashion? Novels tend to contain a lot of drama. Drama tends to contain violence and emotional upset...death and so forth along with various periods of elation. Though today's go kill 12 wolves and get some shitty boots shouldn't equivocate death to anyone, neither should the E-Sport pvp part of these less than spectacular games.
The reality is there's such a lackluster approach to the genre (the wrong folks apparently get to make the games, hence why we have such a crapfest of mediocrity) that squashing pixels on a screen really doesn't compare to just sitting with a group of friends and playing the old pen and paper days. Old fashioned violence...with state of the art graphics (your imagination).
But getting back to MMO's i'd say that trying to infer the games are a hotbed of violence is entirely fallacious, players do not run around attacking things in a fit of anger, there is no anger, its just a game, to have 'violence' there would have to be violent intent.
Violence is an act, not an intent.
You can have a smile on your face and be happy and walk up to someone and punch them in the face and be committing an ACT of violence.
Violence: the intentional use of physical force or power threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation.
Also a doctor performs a violent act when they stab your skin with a needle, yet isn't a negative act.
And that's what I've been trying to wrap my brain around for ages. Anyone and everyone knows what the BARTLE test is, but for those that do not it's that every mmorpg player is made up of 4 parts: Killer, Achiever, Socalizer and Explorer. Unfortunately for us, Killer is the only part of the equation being focused on. Mainly in the form of combat.
Sad thing is that all the tools to flesh out the other 3 aspects are already present in most mmorpgs. For example, in mmorpgs most games have a combat system in place, a crafting system of some sort, a social system (in the form of emotes and chat). And a gathering/mini-map/map/mount system.
Now imagine a scenario in a mmo where a huge dragon attacks a city. And all 4 aspects were called upon to help.
Killers are obviously called upon to repel the threat of the dragon though the use of the combat system of course and once it's gone the other aspects would join.
Achievers would be called in to rebuild building and repair structures with classes, progression and a system devoted to it.
Socializers would be called in to offer assistance through a new system developed using emotes and chat functions (something every mmo has already). They could use /soothe, /calm, /console, /cheer and all sorts of emotes to help buff players and raise morale of npcs. Classes and the emote/chat system would be separate from the other two systems (combat and crafting).
Explorers could be helping through gathering raw materials, recovering items through a salvage/search system that utilizes the minimap and map in ways we never even imagined. And can use mounts in ways the other aspects can only dream of. They could tame and sell mounts.
So there you go:
Killers dominate system would be combat
Achiever dominate system would be crafting
Socializer dominate system would be emotes/chat
Explorers dominate system would be gathering/mini-map/map and mount management
And each system would be represented on each player as a percentage. So if you want to improve an aspect you actually have to do things associated with that aspect.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Originally posted by Grunty Because the games you have chosen to play are focused on those things.Don't like them anymore? Go play games that aren't focused on digital violence. Mahjong (the real one, not the tile matching games that use mahjong tiles), chess, checkers, monopoly, poker, Bejeweled, hidden item search games, Farmville, Scrabble, dominoes. There are thousands of games out there that aren't focused on digital violence but are still focused on competition.There are games whose primary attraction is how much blood and gore they can throw up on your monitor. Do what I do. Don't play them. Neither you nor I are optimistic, happy-go-lucky people but as long as you only focus on the despair you see around you than you will miss that butterfly flitting by doing what it needs to do in order to survive in the real world
I don't think Elikal is saying, "Killing is bad.", but rather, "Aren't there other activities games could be looking into?"
I enjoy a good fight every now and then, especially one where I have to think about how I will overcome my opponent. It may take me 2 or 3 tries.
I feel like games are taking away my choices by presenting the ONLY solution past an obstacle is to fight. There is no dialogue offered to get past, no sneaking past or using invisibility. There is only FIGHT!
I like playing civilization building simulation games where you can be a warring conqueror or win in other ways besides warlike behavior. If you think about it, fighting is the easy way out. Diplomacy takes more thought and work. Economic systems are much more intricate than combat.
Games today are built around fighting, if they have fighting in them. Players seem to want this. Some games have taken the sociopathic cries of "I killed everyone, now my game is broke!" to heart and started creating "essential" or "immortal" NPCs that can not be killed. Now there are sociopathic cries of, "Why can't I kill <NPC Name>?"
I realize many players like to blow off steam and become mass murderers in their "off-time", but games are getting ridiculous. For me, there are so many other reasons to play a game then killing pixels.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by Grunty Because the games you have chosen to play are focused on those things.
Don't like them anymore? Go play games that aren't focused on digital violence. Mahjong (the real one, not the tile matching games that use mahjong tiles), chess, checkers, monopoly, poker, Bejeweled, hidden item search games, Farmville, Scrabble, dominoes.
There are thousands of games out there that aren't focused on digital violence but are still focused on competition.
There are games whose primary attraction is how much blood and gore they can throw up on your monitor. Do what I do. Don't play them.
Neither you nor I are optimistic, happy-go-lucky people but as long as you only focus on the despair you see around you than you will miss that butterfly flitting by doing what it needs to do in order to survive in the real world
I don't think Elikal is saying, "Killing is bad.", but rather, "Aren't there other activities games could be looking into?"
I enjoy a good fight every now and then, especially one where I have to think about how I will overcome my opponent. It may take me 2 or 3 tries.
I feel like games are taking away my choices by presenting the ONLY solution past an obstacle is to fight. There is no dialogue offered to get past, no sneaking past or using invisibility. There is only FIGHT!
I like playing civilization building simulation games where you can be a warring conqueror or win in other ways besides warlike behavior. If you think about it, fighting is the easy way out. Diplomacy takes more thought and work. Economic systems are much more intricate than combat.
Games today are built around fighting, if they have fighting in them. Players seem to want this. Some games have taken the sociopathic cries of "I killed everyone, now my game is broke!" to heart and started creating "essential" or "immortal" NPCs that can not be killed. Now there are sociopathic cries of, "Why can't I kill ?"
I realize many players like to blow off steam and become mass murderers in their "off-time", but games are getting ridiculous. For me, there are so many other reasons to play a game then killing pixels.
Kind of weird to say that games today are built around fighting, I'd say there are more non-killing options out there than there used to be.
Perhaps, this is a more narrow discussion, maybe "MMO's are primarily focused on combat playstyles." You could quite easily play a game that does not involve killing, countless sports titles, The Sims, various building games, puzzle games, platformer games, list goes on.
I think the real issue here is that the OP is talking in a very broad sense about a very specific idea he has in his mind. And that is, "Why are fantasy based MMO's so built around combat and not promoting other aspects of the game more?" Because otherwise the premise is ridiculous. I could hop onto Steam or the itunes/google app stores, or go to gamestop and find not only non-combat related games, but a variety of different types. I could not however, think of a dozen non-combat related MMO's. Not necessarily because they don't exist, but because I do not bother to make myself aware of them.
Also, it's a bit odd to want games in which one of the primary facets of their design is that you arm yourself to the teeth with weapons and magic and then say, "But how come I can't just sit in town and pet ponies?" Of course that's hyperbole, I understand the call for additional non-combat related content, I too, would like to see an increase in it. But this entire argument is disingenuous at best.
Eh, if you look around you violence is every where. It is the easiest thing to make in a game. It is the simplest form of conflict. I agree that devs and publishers should be looking to other types of conflict resolution to mix it up.
I like smoking some zombies, orcs or cultist like anyone but I do appreciate other forms of getting things done. That is why Iike the Deus Ex games so much.
Originally posted by Grunty Because the games you have chosen to play are focused on those things.Don't like them anymore? Go play games that aren't focused on digital violence. Mahjong (the real one, not the tile matching games that use mahjong tiles), chess, checkers, monopoly, poker, Bejeweled, hidden item search games, Farmville, Scrabble, dominoes.There are thousands of games out there that aren't focused on digital violence but are still focused on competition.There are games whose primary attraction is how much blood and gore they can throw up on your monitor. Do what I do. Don't play them.Neither you nor I are optimistic, happy-go-lucky people but as long as you only focus on the despair you see around you than you will miss that butterfly flitting by doing what it needs to do in order to survive in the real world
I don't think Elikal is saying, "Killing is bad.", but rather, "Aren't there other activities games could be looking into?"I enjoy a good fight every now and then, especially one where I have to think about how I will overcome my opponent. It may take me 2 or 3 tries.I feel like games are taking away my choices by presenting the ONLY solution past an obstacle is to fight. There is no dialogue offered to get past, no sneaking past or using invisibility. There is only FIGHT!I like playing civilization building simulation games where you can be a warring conqueror or win in other ways besides warlike behavior. If you think about it, fighting is the easy way out. Diplomacy takes more thought and work. Economic systems are much more intricate than combat.Games today are built around fighting, if they have fighting in them. Players seem to want this. Some games have taken the sociopathic cries of "I killed everyone, now my game is broke!" to heart and started creating "essential" or "immortal" NPCs that can not be killed. Now there are sociopathic cries of, "Why can't I kill ?"I realize many players like to blow off steam and become mass murderers in their "off-time", but games are getting ridiculous. For me, there are so many other reasons to play a game then killing pixels.
Kind of weird to say that games today are built around fighting, I'd say there are more non-killing options out there than there used to be.Perhaps, this is a more narrow discussion, maybe "MMO's are primarily focused on combat playstyles." You could quite easily play a game that does not involve killing, countless sports titles, The Sims, various building games, puzzle games, platformer games, list goes on.I think the real issue here is that the OP is talking in a very broad sense about a very specific idea he has in his mind. And that is, "Why are fantasy based MMO's so built around combat and not promoting other aspects of the game more?" Because otherwise the premise is ridiculous. I could hop onto Steam or the itunes/google app stores, or go to gamestop and find not only non-combat related games, but a variety of different types. I could not however, think of a dozen non-combat related MMO's. Not necessarily because they don't exist, but because I do not bother to make myself aware of them.Also, it's a bit odd to want games in which one of the primary facets of their design is that you arm yourself to the teeth with weapons and magic and then say, "But how come I can't just sit in town and pet ponies?" Of course that's hyperbole, I understand the call for additional non-combat related content, I too, would like to see an increase in it. But this entire argument is disingenuous at best.
You're missing the point. There are plenty of non-violent/non-combat games. Lots. However, IF a game has fighting or combat in it, it quickly becomes the sole focus of the game.
Master of Magic has 2 ways to win: 1) Defeat all other wizards 2) Be the first to cast the Spell of Mastery. The game has combat in it, but it is not the sole activity in the game.
Comparing Morrowind and Skyrim is always fun. In Morrowind, there were 2 quests given by the Mages Guild in Balmora where the player had to collect guild dues from one NPC and try to recruit another NPC into the guild. You were given permission to kill them if needed. However, a player could butter up the NPC and use a skill other than fighting to complete the quest. I can not think of any quest in Skyrim which presented a player a choice of combat or "somthing else." There are quests that do NOT require combat, like the Thieves Guild quests, but if a quest has combat, it is the ONLY option in which to complete it. Has anyone gotten the Dragonstone by pickpocketing the Boss at the end? Do the thiefs that accost a player along the road ever believe the player that says tries to intimidate or persuade them to NOT attack? I have yet to see it work.
MMOs are a mixed bag. Almost anything a player does in an MMO revolves around fighting. There are a few exceptions, of course, like Vanguard's Diplomacy mini game. Most, however have one way to resolve conflicts - Fighting.
Again, it comes back to the players and what sells. If most are NOT fighting (like simply traveling in the world or recovering from a battle), it is deemed boring. Most look for games that take them from fight to fight to fight in the quickest, most efficient way. Violence appears to be what most players want in their games.
If a game has fighting in it, fighting quickly becomes sole activity in that game. It is not a question of "Combat is bad." It is more of an observation that "All there is to do in games is fight, when fighting is included in the game."
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
My favorite example of the "kill kill kill!" mentality that has taken over the MMO community came from SWTOR.
You create a Jedi; the galaxies peace keepers. You murder your way across an entire planet's worth of mobs. Most of the time killing no less than 800-1000 random NPC's.
THEN you get to the final fight on the planet. An evil Sith Lord who killed your master and has tortured and killed thousands of innocent people. You fight the Sith Lord into submission and raise your lightsaber to deliver the completely justified killing blow and as your mouse moves over the option to murder the 1001'st person on the planet... it's a dark side option.
Seriously? WTF? I murdered thousands of people just to get the chance to cut this dudes head off... and THAT's worth dark side points?
Its not that MMOs are violent. Its that its a mechanic that works. Battling something and having a 'victor' is very important in MMOs. Its not really the violence itself that the attraction but the battle. It wouldn't make much difference if the mob just gave up and turned green.. Of if when you battled a soul you sent it to 'heaven' if you won.
I would like to play a game where healing people increases my level. Just makes sense when playing a healing class. Though of course this could be easily abused, perhaps a level cap per day?
I am personally fed up of committing genocide for every quest I do, will see how mmos turn out, currently curious about Project Sparks and Everquest Next Landmark... they seem to focus on creativity and not killing.
that remembers me on the sentence catelyn stark from game of thrones said
"why do kids always play war"
its true not just in the fiction book world even in our, only answer i could find its the most basic way to challange somebody else and we all know the happy feeling if we win a good fight
To the OP and most everyone posting here you're ALL missing the point.
Most of these games that the OP claims is focused on death and gore aren't. It's the players that choose to focus on those things.
Take Final Fantasy XIV: ARR. You don't have to focus on death and gore in that game and once you past level 15 and do a few quests you don't have to kill another single mob for the rest of your characters life. So, want to come again about games focusing on death and gore?
Look at Mabinogi. You don't have to ever kill a single mob in that game to my knowledge. You can play that game as a musician or crafter or whatever the heck you want.
The above aside, what games focus on is NOT death and gore, its story and lore. Has nothing to do with killing bunny rabbit or a goblin or a skeleton. It's about WHY you're doing those things. That's what games are focused on.
Comments
Go on, play an interactive comedy where the same joke is told 100000x to keep people playing. Dramas? boring. Adventure? Limiting without some type of enemy. Love stories? There are plenty of adult games out there.
games built around violence sells the most and so, that is what is being made the most.
Consumer demand drives the market. The very reason why I get pissed when people complain about how the MMO genre is bogged down with clones yet the very same people are still going to go out and buy Wildstar and TESO just because its a new title and they have no MMO home. Just plain madness, the clones wont end with so many people buying the same crap, yet still turn around and complain about it.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
You also missed a big part of his point. The Fantasy genre has always been rooted in heroic deeds, it's not senseless violence, you're supposed to be protecting your lands or saving the world. That's simply a staple of the genre. If you're looking for less violence andor killing, the fantasy genre isn't the place you're going to find it.
There are plenty of other genre's that are suited for what you're looking for, your best bet is in more Sim like games. If you're looking for a role to play that isn't a violent one, look to the more virtual world style of design. Space sims, and the like are the most abundant of these types of games. However, if you're entering into a multi-player version of this, expect to see violence, as well as expect to be a victim of violent actions. That is the sole nature of games that give you options as well as focus on virtual worlds, not everyone in a world is the nice guy.
Another point of note on this topic is that games have tried this non violent approach to MMO design, ATTITD, as well as another larger budget game, I can't quite place the name of at this time. It was cell shaded, that much I remember. Neither ever did so well; the latter was rather short lived, granted ATITD is low budget and that may or may not have determined it's success for it.
TL'DR Look to genre's other than high fantasy, horror, Comical violence, etc... IF you're looking for roles to play that are "non-violent".
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The "Balanced" Games are out there Elikal, you just have to look. It is just these games will most likely be single player games. You can't expect to put players together in the same room and not kill each other in video games, but there are still multiplayer games that have no violence.
Rain - Ps3 - single player
minecraft - Multiplayer building game
Gary's mod - multiplayer building game
Any racing game and any sports games - they have multiplayer
So there are non violent games you can play with friends and have fun. However from what you been saying is that you want a multiplayer game that has killing but it is not the only option. No such thing, don't think it will ever exist. The very moment there is any kind of killing in a multiplayer game, the game will be about killing each other. Or else what would it be about? Hugging each other? You can make a multiplayer game that has non violent distractions, but most of the time that is crafting and what are you crafting? a weapon to better your killing. Building? Building a bunk or house that will later be invaded. A game like DayZ that gives you the option to work together or kill each other and ALWAYS results in killing each other. I don't think it is possible to make a multiplayer game that gives you the option to not mass kill each other. That game does sound boring too.
The other thing about TV, or Movies/Films in general, is that its also the quality that sells, you can shove as much graphic violence and special effects into a film as you like, but there's absolutely no guarantee it will sell, there have been more than a few epic fail movies lately that fall into that category.
But getting back to MMO's i'd say that trying to infer the games are a hotbed of violence is entirely fallacious, players do not run around attacking things in a fit of anger, there is no anger, its just a game, to have 'violence' there would have to be violent intent, and there isnt any, although i can imagine there are a few people who have anger issues that might feel otherwise, but for most, there is none.
Violence is an act, not an intent.
You can have a smile on your face and be happy and walk up to someone and punch them in the face and be committing an ACT of violence.
Violence: the intentional use of physical force or power threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
I don't think fear is the only motivator. Sure it's important but do you really think all of human advances have come about just because someone was afraid of something? I don't. Wild animals don't have a choice about acting on their instincts but humans do. We have free will. We can learn from our mistakes and change our behavior. Of course people still do horrible and stupid things all the time but there is always hope for progress. Just compare western society now with what it was in the Dark Ages. It's far from perfect but things have got a lot better in so many ways.
Wow. I totally didn't see that answer coming.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
You probably shouldn't feed the trolls, lest they multiply. However, Hello Kitty Online itself isn't the best example of what the thread is about, since HKO does in fact have combat, even though it's not the main focus.
I don't think, in the case of A Song of Ice and Fire or The Walking Dead, that the "constant death and torture" is "entertaining" in the sense of giddy enthusiasm but in the sense that it draws people in with high stakes and extremely serious emotional weight. The suffering of fictional characters practically forces us to empathize with them.
Online gaming initially took pen and paper gaming (Advanced Dungeons and Dragons, et al.) to the next level. This game was filled with drama...the kind that involved a lot of death, romance, and all out adventuring. The term RPG was birthed in that concept and died shortly after 2004...Role Playing by default meant we were trying to emulate how people would live in a fantasy setting...and yes...more death followed.
There's also the logic that gamers are meant to be characters in a novel setting - isn't that what all these games really try to do is to emulate The Lord of the Rings novels in some fashion? Novels tend to contain a lot of drama. Drama tends to contain violence and emotional upset...death and so forth along with various periods of elation. Though today's go kill 12 wolves and get some shitty boots shouldn't equivocate death to anyone, neither should the E-Sport pvp part of these less than spectacular games.
The reality is there's such a lackluster approach to the genre (the wrong folks apparently get to make the games, hence why we have such a crapfest of mediocrity) that squashing pixels on a screen really doesn't compare to just sitting with a group of friends and playing the old pen and paper days. Old fashioned violence...with state of the art graphics (your imagination).
Also a doctor performs a violent act when they stab your skin with a needle, yet isn't a negative act.
And that's what I've been trying to wrap my brain around for ages. Anyone and everyone knows what the BARTLE test is, but for those that do not it's that every mmorpg player is made up of 4 parts: Killer, Achiever, Socalizer and Explorer. Unfortunately for us, Killer is the only part of the equation being focused on. Mainly in the form of combat.
Sad thing is that all the tools to flesh out the other 3 aspects are already present in most mmorpgs. For example, in mmorpgs most games have a combat system in place, a crafting system of some sort, a social system (in the form of emotes and chat). And a gathering/mini-map/map/mount system.
Now imagine a scenario in a mmo where a huge dragon attacks a city. And all 4 aspects were called upon to help.
Killers are obviously called upon to repel the threat of the dragon though the use of the combat system of course and once it's gone the other aspects would join.
Achievers would be called in to rebuild building and repair structures with classes, progression and a system devoted to it.
Socializers would be called in to offer assistance through a new system developed using emotes and chat functions (something every mmo has already). They could use /soothe, /calm, /console, /cheer and all sorts of emotes to help buff players and raise morale of npcs. Classes and the emote/chat system would be separate from the other two systems (combat and crafting).
Explorers could be helping through gathering raw materials, recovering items through a salvage/search system that utilizes the minimap and map in ways we never even imagined. And can use mounts in ways the other aspects can only dream of. They could tame and sell mounts.
So there you go:
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
I enjoy a good fight every now and then, especially one where I have to think about how I will overcome my opponent. It may take me 2 or 3 tries.
I feel like games are taking away my choices by presenting the ONLY solution past an obstacle is to fight. There is no dialogue offered to get past, no sneaking past or using invisibility. There is only FIGHT!
I like playing civilization building simulation games where you can be a warring conqueror or win in other ways besides warlike behavior. If you think about it, fighting is the easy way out. Diplomacy takes more thought and work. Economic systems are much more intricate than combat.
Games today are built around fighting, if they have fighting in them. Players seem to want this. Some games have taken the sociopathic cries of "I killed everyone, now my game is broke!" to heart and started creating "essential" or "immortal" NPCs that can not be killed. Now there are sociopathic cries of, "Why can't I kill <NPC Name>?"
I realize many players like to blow off steam and become mass murderers in their "off-time", but games are getting ridiculous. For me, there are so many other reasons to play a game then killing pixels.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Kind of weird to say that games today are built around fighting, I'd say there are more non-killing options out there than there used to be.
Perhaps, this is a more narrow discussion, maybe "MMO's are primarily focused on combat playstyles." You could quite easily play a game that does not involve killing, countless sports titles, The Sims, various building games, puzzle games, platformer games, list goes on.
I think the real issue here is that the OP is talking in a very broad sense about a very specific idea he has in his mind. And that is, "Why are fantasy based MMO's so built around combat and not promoting other aspects of the game more?" Because otherwise the premise is ridiculous. I could hop onto Steam or the itunes/google app stores, or go to gamestop and find not only non-combat related games, but a variety of different types. I could not however, think of a dozen non-combat related MMO's. Not necessarily because they don't exist, but because I do not bother to make myself aware of them.
Also, it's a bit odd to want games in which one of the primary facets of their design is that you arm yourself to the teeth with weapons and magic and then say, "But how come I can't just sit in town and pet ponies?" Of course that's hyperbole, I understand the call for additional non-combat related content, I too, would like to see an increase in it. But this entire argument is disingenuous at best.
Eh, if you look around you violence is every where. It is the easiest thing to make in a game. It is the simplest form of conflict. I agree that devs and publishers should be looking to other types of conflict resolution to mix it up.
I like smoking some zombies, orcs or cultist like anyone but I do appreciate other forms of getting things done. That is why Iike the Deus Ex games so much.
Master of Magic has 2 ways to win:
1) Defeat all other wizards
2) Be the first to cast the Spell of Mastery.
The game has combat in it, but it is not the sole activity in the game.
Comparing Morrowind and Skyrim is always fun. In Morrowind, there were 2 quests given by the Mages Guild in Balmora where the player had to collect guild dues from one NPC and try to recruit another NPC into the guild. You were given permission to kill them if needed. However, a player could butter up the NPC and use a skill other than fighting to complete the quest. I can not think of any quest in Skyrim which presented a player a choice of combat or "somthing else." There are quests that do NOT require combat, like the Thieves Guild quests, but if a quest has combat, it is the ONLY option in which to complete it. Has anyone gotten the Dragonstone by pickpocketing the Boss at the end? Do the thiefs that accost a player along the road ever believe the player that says tries to intimidate or persuade them to NOT attack? I have yet to see it work.
MMOs are a mixed bag. Almost anything a player does in an MMO revolves around fighting. There are a few exceptions, of course, like Vanguard's Diplomacy mini game. Most, however have one way to resolve conflicts - Fighting.
Again, it comes back to the players and what sells. If most are NOT fighting (like simply traveling in the world or recovering from a battle), it is deemed boring. Most look for games that take them from fight to fight to fight in the quickest, most efficient way. Violence appears to be what most players want in their games.
If a game has fighting in it, fighting quickly becomes sole activity in that game. It is not a question of "Combat is bad." It is more of an observation that "All there is to do in games is fight, when fighting is included in the game."
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Because Satan demands souls and I must prepare for the coming apocalypse so that I may secure my place at His side... HAIL SATAN!!!
Or at least that's what some people think.
The real answer is simply, it's easiest, and it's a widely accepted norm.
-------------------------
"Searchers after horror haunt strange, far places..." ~ H.P.Lovecraft, "From Beyond"
Member Since March 2004
My favorite example of the "kill kill kill!" mentality that has taken over the MMO community came from SWTOR.
You create a Jedi; the galaxies peace keepers. You murder your way across an entire planet's worth of mobs. Most of the time killing no less than 800-1000 random NPC's.
THEN you get to the final fight on the planet. An evil Sith Lord who killed your master and has tortured and killed thousands of innocent people. You fight the Sith Lord into submission and raise your lightsaber to deliver the completely justified killing blow and as your mouse moves over the option to murder the 1001'st person on the planet... it's a dark side option.
Seriously? WTF? I murdered thousands of people just to get the chance to cut this dudes head off... and THAT's worth dark side points?
Its not that MMOs are violent. Its that its a mechanic that works. Battling something and having a 'victor' is very important in MMOs. Its not really the violence itself that the attraction but the battle. It wouldn't make much difference if the mob just gave up and turned green.. Of if when you battled a soul you sent it to 'heaven' if you won.
I would like to play a game where healing people increases my level. Just makes sense when playing a healing class. Though of course this could be easily abused, perhaps a level cap per day?
I am personally fed up of committing genocide for every quest I do, will see how mmos turn out, currently curious about Project Sparks and Everquest Next Landmark... they seem to focus on creativity and not killing.
Somehow....you are a "spotlight poster" and this is what you post about?
/me shrugs
that remembers me on the sentence catelyn stark from game of thrones said
"why do kids always play war"
its true not just in the fiction book world even in our, only answer i could find its the most basic way to challange somebody else and we all know the happy feeling if we win a good fight
To the OP and most everyone posting here you're ALL missing the point.
Most of these games that the OP claims is focused on death and gore aren't. It's the players that choose to focus on those things.
Take Final Fantasy XIV: ARR. You don't have to focus on death and gore in that game and once you past level 15 and do a few quests you don't have to kill another single mob for the rest of your characters life. So, want to come again about games focusing on death and gore?
Look at Mabinogi. You don't have to ever kill a single mob in that game to my knowledge. You can play that game as a musician or crafter or whatever the heck you want.
The above aside, what games focus on is NOT death and gore, its story and lore. Has nothing to do with killing bunny rabbit or a goblin or a skeleton. It's about WHY you're doing those things. That's what games are focused on.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!