Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Sigvatr wrote:
The explosions look really good.

Yeah, they do have a nice physics engine.
In one video, by IGN I think, they drove a car into a house, crashing through the wall and then blew it up

If they release mod tools, it might be promising.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

I am probably going to play the Witcher 3

And I laugh at the fact that anyone would take this game too seriously. (Hatred)

Well, people gotta bait those clicks somehow, right? Hatred helps keep food on the tables of gaming journalists. Thats one good thing to come out of it I guess.

Well for Polygon and Kotaku who are just as reliable as the cosmopolitan it is not surprising they would try this at the last second and think themselves relevant in the gaming industry.

Though I think it is funny someone would blame GG for this. I would blame sensationalist game media.

Its the Streisand Effect. The more you whinge and express your outrage, the more developers will seek to feed off that outrage for publicity.

Having only seen TB's video on it, I'll say this: The physics engine is really well done.
I'd love to see that make it's way into more games. The is nothing I like more than tearing through destructible terrain.

The actual gameplay seemed almost boring. yeah it might be a bit fun at first. But it seems like it would quickly get old.

I don't really know if it was worth the AO rating. I think fallout is a bit more graphic. and certainly easier to take seriously.

All in all the controversy surrounding this game seems way overblown.
As is, it's a OK game. I'm not gonna buy it. But I'm sure there are some perfectly normal people who could play this as a bit of a stress reliever.

Or they could choose to not pay money for a crappy game and go play the tons of other games that have casual killing and actually manage to not suck.

*goes off to play blacklight retribution some more*

 Boggy Man wrote:

 Slarg232 wrote:

Mortal Kombat X? Screw that! My kid has to EARN it, just like I did; Handing him a SNES and Mortal Kombat, and when he beats Shang he can have MKII and on.

Ok, but if you make him play MK Mythologies or Special Forces someone should call DSS.

He. Has. To. Earn. It.

 Slarg232 wrote:

 Boggy Man wrote:

 Slarg232 wrote:

Mortal Kombat X? Screw that! My kid has to EARN it, just like I did; Handing him a SNES and Mortal Kombat, and when he beats Shang he can have MKII and on.

Ok, but if you make him play MK Mythologies or Special Forces someone should call DSS.

He. Has. To. Earn. It.

So do my kids (when I have them that is)

No Diablo 2 or 3 till they beat diablo 1!

 Melissia wrote:
Or they could choose to not pay money for a crappy game and go play the tons of other games that have casual killing and actually manage to not suck.

*goes off to play blacklight retribution some more*

Or Insurgency. God I love that game, wish my PC was running. The best way I can describe it is that it's the ARMA version of Counterstrike.

I read the OP and thought so this is the game equivalent of American Psycho the book, nothing great about it just a bit of shock tactics. Seems about right.

 Asherian Command wrote:
I think it was more from people who were like me just got the game to see if the rumors were true.

Did you actually bought this game? For realzies? When you could have bought Shadow Warrior instead?
Did you really felt for that lazy, obvious marketing stunt? It was so obvious, man! Have you even waited for reviews before buying the game?

Meh. It's no worse than 'Smash TV'.... I fail to see the point of this game at all. At least 'Smash TV' was a giggle in two player mode

The point is to trick Asherian and other easily manipulated customers into buying it through controversy, playing on the “evil SJW/journalists are trying to censor video games” narrative that has been pretty popular these days.
Perfect timing.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
I think it was more from people who were like me just got the game to see if the rumors were true.

Did you actually bought this game? For realzies? When you could have bought Shadow Warrior instead?
Did you really felt for that lazy, obvious marketing stunt? It was so obvious, man! Have you even waited for reviews before buying the game?

Infact many of us just wanted to get it just to see how bad it was. (Though I was loaned it by one of my friends played an hour or so and didn't find it that bad)

Hybrid quiet, your throwing gibberish at people and no one is finding it interesting nor do we want to talk about any of that stuff.

Are people seriously still on about this...

 Asherian Command wrote:
no one is finding it interesting nor do we want to talk about any of that stuff.

This. Some people speak of Gamergate as if they knew what it was about, some people just hate on everything and some are just SJW being SJW. All of 'em do nothing but annoy the rest, so keep it to GamerGate threads, please.

Hatred is the Tumblr of video games: trying to be edgy in order to be edgy and get attention. At its core it's a mediocre, very repetitive game. Mods might make it a better game, but right now, I can't recommend it.

 Asherian Command wrote:

Good for you then . Saved some bucks.



Did you try out First Person Lover?

Edit: never mind. Missed a couple posts so read Hybrids comment out of context.

Still, First hand research should be commended, not mocked.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

Good for you then . Saved some bucks.



Did you try out First Person Lover?

I did. It was amusing ...for two minutes. I don't really see how it's supposed to help LGBT issues, seemed more like a parody of LGBT. What exactly was its purpose again?

First person lover is the exact same thing on the opposite spectrum. Terrible gameplay but marketed as "love". Worse, it's just a playable advertisement for a Norse clothes brand. At least it's F2P. Well, paying for an ad would be...weird.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I don't really see how it's supposed to help LGBT issues

I do not think it was supposed to be in any way about LGBT issues. Or LGBT, period. I think it is just supposed to fabulous, and to make fun of the serious and grimdark of some games.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
What exactly was its purpose again?

Advertisement for a clothing company. Any clothes you use on your avatar exist in real-life and there is a link to buy them.

Funny how most people fail to realise that the edgynes and grimnes of the game are infact parody. Also claiming that the game is bad becasue it is repetive makes little sense when far more repetive games like CS:GO or LoL or DOTA seem to be considered quite good.

Those games you listed are competitive esports. While the maps are the same, the games vary drastically with each match as you face new players- who as humans, are far more random and unpredictable than AI.

 Sienisoturi wrote:
Funny how most people fail to realise that the edgynes and grimnes of the game are infact parody. Also claiming that the game is bad becasue it is repetive makes little sense when far more repetive games like CS:GO or LoL or DOTA seem to be considered quite good.

If you consider CS or MOBAs to be repetitive, then you have never played those games and know little about them, sorry.

 Sienisoturi wrote:
Funny how most people fail to realise that the edgynes and grimnes of the game are infact parody. Also claiming that the game is bad becasue it is repetive makes little sense when far more repetive games like CS:GO or LoL or DOTA seem to be considered quite good.

Single player twin stick shooter? Or Multiplayer game with hundreds of characters and tactics?


Single player twin stick shooter? Or Multiplayer game with hundreds of characters and tactics?



Yeah, really not seeing the difference at all....

How is CS:GO not repetitive? The claim that there would be several tactics and great variety are false considering how most of the rounds play pretty much the exact same way, ie. T rushes A or B, and the ones that don't are just two-four players hunting each other by waiting behind a corner. Also the maps bring very little variety to the tactics, as they play pretty much the same. However even though CS is repetive it doesn't make it bad.

PS Sigvatr how much have you played CS?

 Sienisoturi wrote:
Funny how most people fail to realise that the edgynes and grimnes of the game are infact parody.

Even if I am to believe this (and I don't, given how the creators of it described it when it was first put on greenlight), just because something is a parody doesn't mean it's good.

Hatred is a parody of good game design.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Hatred is a parody of good game design.

As is any game that uses contreviorsary as a tool for marketing.

*COUGH* EA *COUGH*

I don't think it's a parody at all.

I think they were serious, but started calling it parody after the controversy started to try to broaden the appeal.

There's no way it's serious. FFS, it's like the game was made for the Navy SEAL meme. The problem is that it's a dry parody, unlike 40k. There's so silly goofball Ork randomness or the shear absurdity of a Khorne Berserker. There's no substance, no meat to the joke. It's a hollow creation with no soul that falls flat when viewed at any angle.