Alright, I have an idea for a game, but I''m not a liberty to share at this moment (not that i dont trust ya''ll Anyways, the story to the game, if it ever got published, would be highly controversal. I mean VERY controversal, I guarantee. It would call out many issues that are affecting the world today, and show both the very good and very bad side of both. On top of that the game would have very realistic, graphic violence - I''m trying to make the game as realistic as possible, and in the real world bullets are nasty. It would also contain strong language. Anyways, my question is this: Does controversy help or hurt a game? Give me your thoughts on this, please. Thanks!!

I think it will all depend upon whether your controversial elements are gratuitous or poignant. Just enough tweaking of peoples comfort levels is often regarded as artistic and edgy. If it seems heaped into the game with no sensible purpose, it will be regarded as trashy and without merit.

I think the rule of thumb is dont include anything unless it has a point. A lot of angry teens do things just because they want to flaunt the rules by doing gross or lude things in public and feeling justified because they have supposedly exposed something about life...but artists do it one better by doing less. A book may be deemed controversial by simply being a normal book with a single, key, controversial element(racism, for instance) that ties in HEAVILY with the point of the book, ie tom sawyer.

I'll toss one other example: Decades ago, the first movie to ever deal with interracial relationships was "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner." It starred some of the biggest actors of the day(people the public were comfortable with), and everybody within the movie was uncontroversial by themselves..no drug addicts, no wife beaters, just doctors and business men: normal people on both sides of the equation..it just so happened that there was a single controversial element that ran the entire movie- a Anglo-saxon girl and an african american male getting married. It blew minds and upset people, but it was 'normal' enough to be respected while the audience mulled it all over.

So, I guess my thought is to not just include something because it is shocking and contrary to the norm, but have purpose in every controversial element...and if you don't just throw it all at once on the audience, they will cope. Dropping them into a bloodbath, however, may shock people too harshly.

[edited by - krikkit on May 3, 2002 12:58:49 AM]

[edited by - krikkit on May 4, 2002 1:00:29 AM]

I think its a good thing. Look at Grand Theft Auto, Duke Nukem, Quake, and games that are based on being a gangster etc... Many of the games arent really that great but sell copies just because people have said its awful and should be banned. The mere fact that people want to ban the game, helps it sell. The Catholic Church learned that the hard way too a long time ago, any book they put on their black list instantly became a popular must have book.
If your idea is really drastic and ''evil'' the best thing you could hope for is to get on the news as one of those "games your kids shouldnt be playing."

I fully agree with what your saying. The game''s violence really won''t be the controversal factor of the game. The controversal factor will be the story, dealing heavily with hot button topics. I decided to go ahead and make the violence very realistic because the game takes place in a very real world with very real problems, and I felt that telling a story such as this and then toning down the realism just to appease the soccer moms and politicians of the world would not do the players of the game justice. So therefore I wont drop them into a blood bath just so that I can make a sell to the angry teenagers of the world who feel the need to blow peoples heads off in games. The violence will serve a point: hopefully to make people realize that the world is in fact messed up, and that all this stylized violence you see in other games is not reality.

Is this an Al Qaeda fps? Perhaps a Palestine vs. Israel rts?

This looks like a job for me/So everybody just follow me/cause we need a little controversy/cause it feels so empty without me

Nah, it doesnt deal with that per say. Alright, I guess i need to explain a little bit about the game then. Look, the game is set in the future, about 30 years. America is on the verge of another civil war do to the civil unrest that has came across the country over genetic reseach and horribly strict restrictions on rights to the after affect of the war on terrorism. You play as a group of people, alternating roles, as they try to stop a terrorist organization that is threatening the Times Square New year''s celebration. The first half of the game plays as a mix of forward happening events in new york, with scenes going back in time to explain how everyone got to the point that they are now. Then the game gets crazy after certain events about halfway throught the game start happening.

Whoa....screwed up that last line. What i meant to say was that half way through the game certain events happen, and then the game gets really crazy.

alright, btw, before everyone jumps my ass for using NY in the game, please remember that firstyl it is set in the future, way after all the stuff that has happen there lately. Secondly, i picked new york on purpose, because using a place with that history attached to it now will really help people understand the political statements that the game is trying to make. Im trying to make different statements in the game, but im not going to force feed them to you. Im trying to make a future that I see can easily happen, and then let you make up your own opinions on the subject discussed.

and ppl wonder why you cant use other places in the usa where terriosts ahve attaxck. heh. use ny, as it really wont matter if its done tastfully. dont exgerrate too much, and dont show things like ppl falling out of buildings. while realistic, it is not required to get teh point across. in fact a mere image of the twin towers ablaze on a front page of a newspaper within the game woudl be enough. the key is moderation. dont do things for the sake of it. strong langauge and profainity are not always required, and in fact you can show quite a bit of emption wthout profanity. same with graphic violence. amking everythgin realistic wont make a fun game. leave political statments to print, music, and tv/movies. games dont work well with that because you need to have ppl enjoy them gameplay and not be caring about something controversal. show the usa in turmoil in the future, just remeber, its vouge to have usa pride, so your game wont do very well.

so i am guessing a aingle bullet wound means the player is dead eh? (loss of blood).