We need blood

[Paas]

Re: We need blood

Give me blood. Give me violence. Give me atomic explosions, nuclear fallout, and scarlet clouds raining down internal organs and disembodied extremities. I love it. And best of all, it stays in my computer where I'm safe from it. Put your blame where it belongs: on bad parents.

True. Bad parenting does play a role in all of this. Yet. Blood still isn't needed in Bf2. It's a waste.

Also, considering there are blood mods that would do it MUCH better than the Devs ever would, why not go play those?

{WP}Paas

[3Libras]

Re: We need blood

As much as I enjoyed reading Warbird's post, I can't help but feel it doesn't really fit into this thread very well. There are many, many many precedents to this subject. CS is far more popular as a good example, and no one feels blood ruins that game save maybe a few.

puglous brings up some fine points (as always ) as people usually have exterior reasons to do something sick like murder. Being used to blood and people being chopped up like hamburger on a computer screen would only offer so much more comfort to committing the crime. With all the violence and corruption in our society, on TV, in games, movies, everything- Something like adding blood to bf2 wouldn't and couldn't add anything to the recipe. I like your concept and it was a nice post, but in regards to the thread, I think it'd make a fine addition as long as it doesn't get out of hand. Tom Clancy-like blood.

[puglous]

Re: We need blood

Thanks :)

[Warbird_7]

Re: We need blood

First, I would like to thank you for taking the time to reply to my post.

1) Pointing out the perils of modern youth and the desensitization towards violence in a forum about a war-based videogame TO WHICH YOU ARE A MEMBER.

The point of this is, and how it fits into a thread about blood, is that he’s been desensitized…You can make the argument that a war game in and of itself desensitizes people, so why have them at all? As I previously stated, BF2 has a sharp contrasts between itself and the real world.

I am not protesting war games in general. What would I be doing on a BF2 forum if I hated war games or FPS? I am specifically against the desensitization that could take place if blood (and gore) were added to the standard BF2 game. That’s all.

2) Desensitization towards violence doesn't mean we don't care. It means we don't freak out about it and over react.

Let’s not play a game of extremes here, you can obviously take an Anti-Violence-In-Games stance too far.

Maybe our current congress could have benefited from some gold old fashion desensitization towards violence.

This isn’t a discussion of politics. What Congress could or could not have gained from, “…some gold [sic] old fashion [sic] desensitization towards violence” is irrelevant as to whether blood and gore should be put into Battlefield 2.

Yeah. It's definitely the videogames killing America.

Did I say anything about “…killing America”? A sizeable percentage of the population doesn’t even play video games. I realize the sarcastic nature behind this comment; but it has been put so broadly that it is inaccurate as to what I am trying to say.

It is the blood and gore that would desensitize young players. Is there blood and gore in every video game? No. Therefore, I am not taking the stance that “It’s definitely the videogames killing America.”

And I can tell you for a fact that video games don’t kill. I whacked my friend with an SNES cartridge on the temple once; he lived.

3) Aren't there such things as movies? Saving Private Ryan, Shindler's List, Amistad... in fact, these movies with such glaringly realistic monsterous [sic] abilities of the human race to do horrible horrible things shock us in quite the opposite manner then you'd lead us to believe.

Huh? Let me read that again.

…shock us in quite the opposite manner then you'd lead us to believe.

Wait, I thought we were discussing blood and gore in BF2. When did movies get into this?

4) Finally: If videogames did in fact incite violence in some people, I'd have to say that the reason is due to the complete polar opposite of what you said. The lack of reality.

That’s not what I am concerned about. It’s their attitude towards violence that I am concerned about.

So, what’s the worst case scenario? You’ve played Battlefield, with blood, gore, and limbs flying all over the place. Same thing as in the last paragraph, except this time you aren’t shocked. You feel nothing. You’ve seen it all before, and killing a human being in real life isn’t really a bigger deal than the killing you’ve done in Battlefield.

Who knows why people commit murder? My worry is that the value of a human life will decrease.

While I fully support that we can add realism mods based on our tastes, and have no problem with the stock game coming as it has, the lack of realism would lead to a harsher penalty on society than gore would. If you really believe someone would act out something they saw in a videogame or movie, that wasn't already psychotic to begin with and waiting to be triggered by anything remotely violent, then wouldn't you think some realism would insert that subtle spark of

"Wait. Maybe this won't be a good idea."

But that's silly anyway because videogames don't cause people to kill or hurt each other. Even children have a basic understanding of right and wrong. And like a child, any viewer of violence be it realistic or cartoonish, is going to have to ask themselves whether it's a good idea to try in real life.

See above. I’m not saying that video games cause people to kill each other. I’m saying that the blood and the gore desensitize players, eroding their humanity.

Give me blood. Give me violence. Give me atomic explosions, nuclear fallout, and scarlet clouds raining down internal organs and disembodied extremities. I love it. And best of all, it stays in my computer where I'm safe from it. Put your blame where it belongs: on bad parents.

Regarding your bloodlust, I have no comment. Yes, you are correct. Bad parenting is a major factor in desensitization; especially if no effort is made at teaching or showing the value of human life. But if this is the dilemma, then blood and the gore will only cause the humanity of the individual to grow smaller.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to respond to my post.

[Warbird_7]

Re: We need blood

You talk as if humans are creators of emotion with no sense of logical reasoning.

I am not denying that humans have the capability to think logically. But if this ability was as much a part of decision making as you make it out to be, then why are we wasting time playing a pointless game? Logic tells us that sitting in front of a computer screen playing a game whose servers will be non existant in twenty years is a waste of our time. So, if we were to follow our logic, this discussion would not be taking place. But the fact is that we are. And the fact is that we enjoy playing BF2, it's exciting. Humans have the ability to think logically, but seldom are they not motivated primarily by their emotions. Sorry to use this example, but is it logical to sleep around, knowing that today there is a good chance of contracting an STD that could potentially kill you? No, but people do it anyway. Why? Because it "feels good".

I admit, years of playing gory games has desensitized me to gore.
I no longer feel sick when I turn on the news and see gruesome image that are supposedly okay to show simply because it is not a movie or TV show (which is totally BS logic). However, just because it doesn't seem "gross" doesn't mean people lose a sense of right or wrong. If you aren't killing people simply because you think it would look gross, YOU are the lowest scum on this earth.

I am in complete agreement with you. Such an attitude indicates questionable morals.

And what kind of 12 or 13 year old wouldn't know that people don't respawn when they get shot in the head? I knew that when I was 3. I mean, c'mon, you talk about humans like they have the intelligence of plants. If they are able to figure out how to install the game in the first place, they have the intelligence to know people don't respawn after you shoot them in the head.

Of course, I am not suggesting that the violence spurs people to murder each other. I am suggesting that the blood and gore reduces the value of human life in the eyes of the young player to the point where such an occurance in real life would mean nothing.

Those who laugh at the destruction to the world trade center are messed up to begin with. Probably best we find out now by letting them play violent videogames than later when they grow up to murder someone.

And I bet those soldiers with TSD sure wished they had been prepared to see such horrors.

No argument here.

[PBJTime]

Re: We need blood

See above. I’m not saying that video games cause people to kill each other. I’m saying that the blood and the gore desensitize players, eroding their humanity.

I just have to respond to this as it seems like it pretty much sums up your posts on the matter (correct me if I'm wrong.)

I can tell you that I've been playing violent games all my life from the Mortal Kombat series to Quake to Doom. No amount of animated violence could have ever desensitized me for what I encountered in both Iraq and Afghanistan as a Marine and I'd be quick to say that's probably the case with the majority of the men I fought with. Seeing an animated body blow to chunks is vastly different than seeing something even as minor (relatively speaking) as a bullet wound to an arm.

There is such an extreme difference in animated violence and real world violence that I don't believe anybody, from a child to an adult, could honestly get desensitized from playing a game. They don't lose their humanity or anything like that. If they did, they were deeply disturbed to begin with. I can't think of anyone I know that's ever seen a traumatic injury and didn't think twice about it because they'd seen worse in video games. It's a rediculous thought to me, to be perfectly honest.

The only time I've seen people become desensitized is when they are constantly exposed to real life traumas. This is usually in the form of someone in the medical field.

Now on to my thoughts on the original subject. I think there should be some form of realistic blood in this game. I'm not suggesting anything extreme but I'm all about realism.

[[1RGR]LD|Pvt.Amerikai]

Re: We need blood

I think that anybody who has ever played a violent game, and then experienced real violence in life were desesnitized(sp?) by the game, unless they forced themselves to accept it, in which case the person is unstable.
But I think it is unfair to all those who have experienced real life violence and then compare that to violence portrayed in media, for it is always humourous/exciting or plays on our false love for these characters, which can never compare to real life love.
The bottom line is(always a fun phrase to use) that violence is part of our life, we see it everyday, it surronds us, every aspect of our life can be touched by violence, but what keeps us human and seperates ourselves from the beasts of this world is that we have the ability to ignore this violence, to not become involved. And when this comes to games, and wether or not violence should be included, one must ask themselves, how much of a beast are you?

[rtgbs7k]

Re: We need blood

I think that anybody who has ever played a violent game, and then experienced real violence in life were desesnitized(sp?) by the game, unless they forced themselves to accept it, in which case the person is unstable.

comma overdose/rapage:)
I'd say that a person that is able to differ from fiction and real-life is very stable. One who isn't - is unstable/weak minded.

I believe FPS-Doug is a good example of a unstable person and, unfortunately, probably represents some of the gamers around :laugh:

[Jofaba]

Re: We need blood

I think Warbird must have the wrong system time on his computer, or else maybe it's just showing up for me that his reply posts were sorted out of order? I'm not accusing him, it's just something I've noticed in several forums.

Anyway, first off, I'm not angry or bitter or anything, and thank you for replying along with qoutes from my own rant. As with many times before, I probably should have reread what I wrote a couple more times before submitting it. Unfortunately I let sarcasm and some just plain rudeness taint the points I was trying to make.

I guess my plain and simple reflection on your first post is that I find the logic of finding a balance between cartoony violence and realistic imaginary violence, to be flawed. It seems as though you have a moral stance against things that portray excessive violence in what you view to be a very impressionable chunk of society, and yet it contradicts some of your own "guilty pleasures".

And that's okay. Every one of us has our own opinions that are uniquely right for us, and seemingly just how things ought to be. My opinion is that if any level of imaginary violence is acceptable, then all levels should be acceptable. For example; when I listen to the radio and someone says a curse word, I generally hear either the beginning or the end, and the rest is masked by some sort of sound effect. But in my head I still hear the curse word because I'm familiar with them and in which context they are generally used.

But it's not bleeped out on my behalf. It's bleeped out for the people who haven't gotten to that verbal maturity yet; namely children. Even the church-going listeners hear the word in their head, and most are just as upset about the hint of vulgarity as they would be if it was said outright.

Battlefield 2 is a war game. Given the fact that we're currently in multiple wars in real life, the very fact that some facets of society are gaining enjoyment from imagining being in those very wars, would, and maybe even should, cause unrest for society as a whole*. I'd be surprised if there were any mothers, fathers, brothers or sisters of people fighting now or who have died in Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere, playing Battlefield 2. And if they are, I'm sure that a classroom of psychologists would have a field day explaining why they think its happening**.

I'd guess that 98% of this community only wants to see fields of dead bodies inside their games. I'm also guessing that most of us are thinking of the romanticized side of War everytime we log onto a map. But there is a bloodlust that goes along with that romance, and that's the point that I was trying to make with the end of my own rant. I don't have a literal bloodlust that's that extreme. This whole thread is about people who want more blood (or don't) in the game, which is already available through two mini-mods that I'm aware of. And while I appreciate the realism that the blood from those mods add, I play them for the other changes (like the ability to blow up a uav trailer with a tank instead of just c4)

eh... I guess I just can't do short posts void of a rant. I apologize for that.

okay, here's a one sentence summary: I have faith that society can maintain an acceptance to imaginary violence for entertainment purposes, while condemning acts of true violence, because it's human nature to be curious, fearful and excited all at once, and to suggest or impliment barriers on any form of ficticious act or idea, will only lead to the decay of a free society.

Maybe I stretched a bit by creating an arguably RUN ON sentence, but it's quarter to seven in the morning and I just got home from 5 hours of sorting packages at FedEx and working on 3 hours of sleep so please forgive me =P

--------------------------------------
* Put into context: If tomorrow morning every newspaper in the world came out with the headline "War Simulation Games The Most Popular Genre In America!", it would obviously only add to America's image problem with the rest of the global community.

** I'm slightly hesitant to make this statement because I have talked to several veterans of previous wars in these forums, and one even posted his thoughts on the subject in this forum. While I don't know anything about them personally or to what extreme they have experienced war, I can only imagine that they were lucky and their list of horrible experiences are smaller than others. Also, my psychologist reference is not meant as a judgement of character or sanity, I simply mean that experts on human judgement and behaviour would most likely still debate why people do what they do after bad things happen.

*** I should probably regret that my signature currently looks like a mushroom cloud for this thread...

[Blue Geezer]

Re: We need blood

mortal kombat deja vu.....


feeling weak.....

[Warbird_7]

RE: Jofaba's reponse

Wow. Now that has to be one of the most mature responses to a difference of opinion I have yet come across on this forum. Jofaba, that was an excellent and diplomatic post. You, sir, have earned my respect.