“Hatred” Is A Game That Will Cause A Shitstorm

Well now.

I’m not quite sure what to say about this. You guys know me, and you know it takes a metric fuck-ton to offend me and I most definitely wouldn’t classify myself as a prude by any means, but my jaw was on the floor the entire time I watched this. On one end, I remind myself that it’s only a game, and violence in video games is as abundant as, well, oxygen in the air. But this trailer comes across as a pointless murdering simulator. Then again, is it THAT different from games like Uncharted? Is it because we’re given a “reason” for Nathan Drake to kill hundreds of of nameless people I don’t feel the same way I do when I watch Hatred?

I think it’s the tone that makes me feel a bit off about the entire thing. Granted, maybe this is some marketing stunt and there’s a “reason” why homeboy’s going on a mass murder spree. Who knows. I know a series called Postal is a thing that was released back in the day, and from what I heard it was a bit like Hatred. In any case, I can only imagine the press/reception this thing is going to get if it’s picked up by certain…outlets.

“Well you shouldn’t promote this game, then.”

Perhaps, but I also think it’s healthy for us, as gamers, as a community, to discuss what is acceptable and what isn’t and learn from different perspectives when something like this pops up. Y’know?

I’m most curious about your thoughts and opinions. Let me know what you think!


  1. I think if it stuck exclusively with the twin-stick shooter look, it probably would’ve been okay as a novelty. It’s the execution scenes that make it a bit more unsettling than it has to be.

    That said, it feels a bit hammy, too. One could make the argument that it isn’t any less offensive than Manhunt on the PS2.

    We’ll have to wait and see what the final product is like before we know for sure how to judge this. For now, though, it feels like shocking for shock’s sake, which really just makes it kinda hokey.

  2. Yeah that left me feeling a bit uneasy. Can’t disagree with Boots in that the top down gameplay seems a bit more tolerable. Those execution scenes are just too personal and theatric for me. Not saying anyone shouldn’t be allowed to make the game, just curious why anyone would want to… Is there a snuff-game market out there?

    Also, they should get a different voice actor. The guy from every action movie preview of the ’90’s was not a good choice.

  3. This just feels like the creator had no class at all. You can make an ultra violent game and have it be compelling as well. This just feel like they are going for sloppy shock value and media attention.

  4. As I watch, it seems like the game heavily borrows from its roots: The jagged letter look of the Doom logo, a grungied-up version of the protagonist from Painkiller, Postal-style game play, and graphic kill scenes al la Manhunt. The only thing they didn’t seem to care about is plot. “Grrr. I’m angry. I go shooty-shoot people. Merrrrrrh.” Heck, even Manhut, for all of its controversy, had a semi-interesting web of conspiracy involved.

    I really feel like they’re just going for shock value here. I’m betting there will be a loyal group of young males who will love it, and everyone else will just avoid it. Also, a lot of the games that have tried this desperately wave their arms in the air for attention, then fizzle into blandness.

    The developers have two big problems that games like Manhunt, Postal, and even the original GTA didn’t have: highly-publicized mass killings, and the rapid spread of media. The media and general public will give this company quite a pounding in the coming months.

  5. If I’m being completely honest, I kinda enjoyed it. I know it’s not going to be some video game high art, but I like the game’s style and how it’s not shying away from a touchy subject.

    And honestly, after that ‘No Russian’ mission in Modern Warfare 2, I don’t think I can find offense in games that make me slaughter innocent people. I’ve become totally desensitized to it (in games of course, before anyone starts thinking I’m a psycho), so even without much purpose behind it I still find it hard to be offended by it.

  6. The problem here is that there’s no opposing force – the objective appears to be to straight-up murder innocent people. That’s how the game is portraying itself – the NPC avatars are sympathyzable, the actions of your avatar are brutal and unprovoked.

    I love games, most of them violent (Gears of War, for one). I even love having my little murder sprees in games like GTA every now and then because it is a deviation from my objective, and so in itself breaks the immersion. But Hatred appears to be taking that role very seriously – it wants you to feel like a murderer. And that is fucked up.

  7. This looks like the type of game that is just MADE to stir up controversy. There is the chance that there is some type of plot to the game that the developer just isn’t hitting on yet but, more than likely, this is one of them “murder simulators” we’ve been hearing about since the Jack Thompson days.

    That being said, Fox News is going to have a field day with this one. And if the game is nothing more than just murdering innocent people, this is going to make the politicians get involved with trying to regulate things again.

    Either way, the developer is getting attention. I’m pretty sure that is one of their goals.

  8. It’s not that it’s a video game that’s the problem, it’s that it engenders people into violence just for the sake of violence. There is a large following for ‘gore’ movies too, and it plays with those same emotions. Usually they lean toward the B-movie grouping, but not always. Natural Born Killers for instance. It’s one thing to take you through a story of slaughter when leading you into an understanding of why this person becomes a killer, but it’s a complete lack of reason that brings an audience to hatred, violence, and blood without any thought but malice. It’s these sort of things that should be rated X. Even the game of Postal used a twisted humor to arrive at that blood. The only emotions involved in that game was to play around, and do stupid things.
    I don’t believe in boycotting, or making a game like this totally illegal, but anything that pushes the audience into thinking that acting out hatred or anger with violence needs to be controlled in who can play it. Kids and teens will want to play any game they can get their hands on, and on the surface this doesn’t look much different than Call of Duty or any other bloody game, but that video points to their drive at a very realistic violent response for unreasonable hatred. There are so many parents that completely allow their kids to play anything or watch anything, because usually there’s a moral, or a high-ground perspective to them… or just plain silliness. This is a whole level of difference. Rated X games, like this should be, need to have a legal way to force game sellers to restrict the sale of them. Not without a parent, nor with one approving the sale. If any indication that this will be played by a youth is apparent, it should not be sold. Any parent found to be allowing it to be played by a minor should be treated as if they were sitting their children in front of pornography. Any adult purchase should have that info pushed into their faces, so they realize how strongly it should be controlled.

    All that said… I will probably play it, just to see if it is as bad as they suggest it to be… and probably vent my own frustrations.

  9. Games are an escape. They allow people an emotional outlet
    that is reasonable as opposed to the unreasonable. People can pick up any game such as GTA and use it as a violent outlet. Their inspiration can be the torture
    from kids at school or their life near or at their home. This game is not so
    different except it is specifically and exclusively designed for it. We
    cannot simply assume those with that level of hate will act that way in
    reality. This game exists so we will not.

    Now and then, a great many people seek out blood guts,
    horror, and murder in entertainment but that does not mean they want to
    participate in the real thing. For the majority there is always a safety net of
    knowing, “this is not real,” “I am safe.” For others, now and then, they pursue
    mindless violence toward innocent people in games and movies but that is a
    specific pursuit made as immersive as they desire at the time. It’s the frequency,
    realism, and immersivness of that pursuit that we should monitor. Most people
    have an adequate sense of justice to at least imagine someone they know that
    deserves harm and not death. Again, it is a very small niche that would imagine
    a real death as they submerge into the altered reality of a video game or

    And yes, it could easily be marketing approach to make us
    think it is a mindless, plot-less, violence simulator, but that’s not new. The
    predecessor titles appeal to a small market.

    I am with Pachilles. Monitor the irresponsible parents and
    the other people inclined to this level of immersive violence and the frequency
    in which they pursue that immersion.

  10. We already have games for killing people randomly when we’re bored. And people watch movies in the horror genre because they want to see innocent people maimed in some interesting way.

    People will whine.


    Half-Life 3 confirmed.

  11. So while watching the trailer, my jaw was on the floor as well. This is kind of ridiculous if it’s a real game. With all the senseless violence and shootings in the world today, why does this exist? Some of those places in the trailer looked like schools. And that’s NOT okay.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.