Gibs - yes or no?

[imported_Infiltrator]

I guess playing UT,Ofp and Arma makes me sick.

Yes you are. Anyone who has played quake and enjoyed it - he's a sick atrocity to the society and beyond redemption. Only murderers, rapists, psychopaths and deranged personalities could find these death factories fun.

I myself am in constant hiding, God forbid if I should get caught playing UT3.

[The_Eliminator]

they provide broadband in St Annes now?

[L3adcannon]

the poll is practically 50-50, i personally dont think thats enough to change any devs mind.

Well yeah, no matter how many polls or petitions we make, they won`t change anything in the game. The poll is there just to see how many are agains and for gore.

Yes you are. Anyone who has played quake and enjoyed it - he's a sick atrocity to the society and beyond redemption. Only murderers, rapists, psychopaths and deranged personalities could find these death factories fun.

I myself am in constant hiding, God forbid if I should get caught playing UT3.

Damn, I loved Quake 2. Doesn`t take much to become a rapist I see.

[TheDesert_Fox]

While we're at it, let's remove the pretty graphics too. I mean, specular mapping? Who needs it? High res textures, polygons? Just too many, let's remove all that, because the game would again play just the same without it.

It wouldn't be the same, actually. Visibility plays a great deal into games, especially things like shadows and dynamic lighting for muzzle flashes which add stealth and tracking. Blood can help here, yes. A splatter on a wall like what we already have is good for tracking, same with bloody footsteps (might be nice, I admit).

It adds fun.

For you. I don't think it adds fun. You can't win an argument of opinions.

I play games because I want to have fun, since you don't have a problem saying most of the people who voted Yes are sick in the head (even though I told you it's offensive once), I'm sure you don't mind being labeled as mentally latent, because you certainly fill out the prerequisites.

You're not going to get an apology by simply offending a person back. I don't have a problem saying that to others, they are if blood is a such a big deal to have for pure entertainment and no purpose at all. A puff of red or a shower of steaming crimson death changes very little other than the sadistic pleasure some people find in the latter.

Another senseless argument. Even if people do want it for realsim, why go watch people get cut up by a doctor? Unless the doctor is dressed a military uniform in the middle of a desert/forest and he's cutting people from range with a gun.

I was hoping you wouldn't butcher this one, pun intended. That was an analogy, you see. A person seeking realism would prefer being a doctor as opposed to playing the Operation board game. A person seeking gibs for entertainment would rather be standing as an audience to the operation as they would to a casual film in the theaters. Notice how it's not a literal translation?

Who is we? Poll shows that the majority does need blood. For those who don't like it almost every game has a gore on/off option. For the majority, the blood is part of the gameplay, but you can keep living in denial and refusing to believe it for all I care.

Perhaps some people want it for a tactical use, rather than kicks and giggles as their monitors get familiar with the color red. I don't mind blood if it has a use, a good use. It has some, and most of those uses are already implemented. So I'll end this off with a simple statement: Blood is vulgar and mostly unnecessary. It has no use being implemented any more than it already is and will serve only to offend and disgust.

the poll is practically 50-50, i personally dont think thats enough to change any devs mind.

Aside from the fact that 50 people is hardly a broad survey, and the demographics of this forum aren't exactly the same as the real world.

[imported_Infiltrator]

It wouldn't be the same, actually. Visibility plays a great deal into games, especially things like shadows and dynamic lighting for muzzle flashes which add stealth and tracking. Blood can help here, yes. A splatter on a wall like what we already have is good for tracking, same with bloody footsteps (might be nice, I admit).

Actually what I said wouldn't change the game at all. Specular mapping for example has 0 impact on gameplay, yet it's there.

For you. I don't think it adds fun. You can't win an argument of opinions.

This goes both ways.

You're not going to get an apology by simply offending a person back.

An apology? I wasn't expecting one. But I don't keep offending after being asked not to.

I don't have a problem saying that to others, they are if blood is a such a big deal to have for pure entertainment and no purpose at all. A puff of red or a shower of steaming crimson death changes very little other than the sadistic pleasure some people find in the latter.

This is your opinion. Which I disagree with.

I was hoping you wouldn't butcher this one, pun intended. That was an analogy, you see.

Pretty bad analogy to be honest.

A person seeking realism would prefer being a doctor as opposed to playing the Operation board game. A person seeking gibs for entertainment would rather be standing as an audience to the operation as they would to a casual film in the theaters. Notice how it's not a literal translation?

All I can notice here is random, incoherent assumptions and prejudice.

Perhaps some people want it for a tactical use, rather than kicks and giggles as their monitors get familiar with the color red. I don't mind blood if it has a use, a good use. It has some, and most of those uses are already implemented. So I'll end this off with a simple statement: Blood is vulgar and mostly unnecessary. It has no use being implemented any more than it already is and will serve only to offend and disgust.

Most of the visuals in a game don't have a practical nor tactical use. It just makes it easier on the eye. For reference see quake 3 graphics on professional tourneys compared to all max settings. So this is yet another in the line of pointless arguments.

Also, I disagree about the blood part, as it is again only your personal opinion (do yourself a favor and follow your own advice).

Aside from the fact that 50 people is hardly a broad survey, and the demographics of this forum aren't exactly the same as the real world.

No point arguing with numbers.

[TheDesert_Fox]

I don't feel like typing so many "quote" and "/quote", so my responses are in bold.

Actually what I said wouldn't change the game at all. Specular mapping for example has 0 impact on gameplay, yet it's there.
Yet it isn't gruesome dismemberment of humans. It doesn't change gameplay, but it also has no negative features.

This goes both ways.
Who said it didn't?

An apology? I wasn't expecting one. But I don't keep offending after being asked not to.
Heh, pointless blood and gore offends me, and most likely a few others, but you keep fighting for it.


This is your opinion. Which I disagree with.
Okay, that's fine with me. So what do you think? You think that there is a gameplay difference between a puff and a stream? Then say so rather than just saying you disagree.

Pretty bad analogy to be honest.
Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Maybe you should get checked for cataracts.

All I can notice here is random, incoherent assumptions and prejudice.
How so? If you'd actually explain something we'd be able to debate it. I haven't assumed anything, I know people would like to see more gore just for entertainment, you're proof. The thing random is you using the word random as a rebuttal. The analogy makes sense and fits well enough, you can either have gore for a reason (operating on a person, maybe saving a life) or gore for no reason (sitting around watching an operation). As for prejudice, I haven't made opinions about anyone without reason. The fact that you enjoy watching people (virtual though they are) die in gruesome ways is enough to reasonably give you the worse role in the analogy.

Most of the visuals in a game don't have a practical nor tactical use. It just makes it easier on the eye. For reference see quake 3 graphics on professional tourneys compared to all max settings. So this is yet another in the line of pointless arguments.
I play BF2142, I know about using low setting to get rid of shadows to make rooms brighter. It's not my fault developers have caused this. It's not the technology's fault that shadows are inherently dark and some games allow them to be removed. Okay, some visuals in a game aren't needed for gameplay. How is more blood needed for gameplay?

Also, I disagree about the blood part, as it is again only your personal opinion (do yourself a favor and follow your own advice).
Gore isn't vulgar? Because it's natural? I can't say **** since it's vulgar, yet we all have it too. Much like a scientific law is made after many trials have the same result, an opinion shared by so many becomes closer to fact. Besides, three of your responses above were your opinions.

No point arguing with numbers.
Yes, the 50% or so majority of people 14-18 really represent a balanced poll. No point arguing by trying to get rid of your opponents points when you make none of your own. Sorry this has little to do with numbers, but so far you've done nothing but say how I'm wrong, without ever saying how you may be right. Let's hear a reason how more blood will help.

[The_Eliminator]

i can see this has spiraled out of control as the main original topic, we are all getting to much into internal affairs now.

I think we should just lock the thread and move on.

[TheDesert_Fox]

i can see this has spiraled out of control as the main original topic, we are all getting to much into internal affairs now.

I think we should just lock the thread and move on.

Good idea. It's clear neither side will change their beliefs, and it's not like IW will do anything because a few intrawebz folk argued in a thread about it.