"Hatred" video game open discussion

[Nightstream88]

Not really interested in the game, mostly because the gameplay didn't look that appealing to me, but then again I didn't think I would like SAO Hollow fragment on Vita either and yet it probably is my current favorite Vita game. So I guess watching gameplay videos doesn't always help

Edited May 28, 2015 by Nightstream88

[marcisaie]

Watched the gameplay video on Gamespot. 

 

I agree with mostly everyone, it doesn't look that nice. 

 

Also, the violence turned me off. Yes, GTA can be bloody and violent, but Hatred is on another level. At least GTA is more than curb-stomping your next door neighbor. 

 

[PleaseHoldOn]

They have the right to make whatever they want.

 

We have the right to choose whether or not we compensate them for their efforts (ie. buy the game).

 

...

 

That's basically where the conversation should begin and end.  Personally, if it's on sale someday for $2 I may get it.  The game itself doesn't offend me, and honestly looks like it could hit that same part of the brain that GTA does when I shoot a woman execution style after ripping her from her vehicle, then plow into a crowd of NPC's at a nearby marketplace.

 

That being said, it's embarassingly obvious they're making the game to stir up some controversy, knowing full well how people would react to it this day and age.  Just look at that gameplay trailer and the "premise" of the game (angry loner taking his revenge on the world like oh so many school/mall/movie theater shooters).  There's no artistic integrity there, completely shameless pot stirring.

[Hailst0rm_2]

I thought it was a mediocre game until I saw the amount of destruction, you can take down entire buildings and bust vehicles straight through the walls of a house (Compare it to GTA all you like but it has a bland environment with little to no destructibility aside from vehicles). That kind of interactivity makes it interesting, I wishlisted it.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Hailst0rm_2

[coldkillaaaaaaaa]

I thought it was a mediocre game until I saw the amount of destruction, you can take down entire buildings and bust vehicles straight through the walls of a house (Compare it to GTA all you like but it has a bland environment with little to no destructibility aside from vehicles). That kind of interactivity makes it interesting, I wishlisted it.

 

That's because it's a top-down shooter with arcade-esque detail which literally means it's outdated and can afford "destruction" on such a small scale, it'd be much more difficult for a game like GTA to elaborately demonstrate each level of detail to be torn apart, unless you want it done in a sloppy way where it just randomly pops into tiny rubble lol, besides GTAs entire world is interactive and far from bland, Rockstar are the kings at making worlds, to say it's bland doesn't even make sense, c'mon hail, stop trolling mang  

[dakk55]

Honestly, I couldn't even care less about a game that I haven't played, let alone not planning to play. I tend to reserve my opinion until I can talk to couple of my friends and play a copy of said game, but 'till then....

 

[Dr_Mayus]

I completely forgot about this game. I thought it came out awhile ago. Oh well, I will continue to ignore it.

[HaSoOoN-MHD]

I think the game looks fun! I thought the trailer and voice-work were well-done and it looks interesting. Not many games put you in the mind of an utter psychopath that had a mental breakdown. It looks very arcade-y and that appeals to me as a gamer. I'll definitely be buying this when it comes out. I don't care about the graphics as long as I have fun with the game.

If you're expecting a genuine look into the mind of a troubled person you're going to be disappointed. The idea is made for the sake of offense and controversy, nothing more.

If it looks fun to you fair enough I suppose.

[Remilia Scarlet]

If you're expecting a genuine look into the mind of a troubled person you're going to be disappointed. The idea is made for the sake of offense and controversy, nothing more.

If it looks fun to you fair enough I suppose.

 

Oh, I know that. I'm not expecting some kind of story on the scale of BioShock or anything. I'm just saying what the trailer showed us. I just expect to have fun and that's all that matters. Everyone is tearing this game apart for how it looks like trash and that they're not going to give it a second thought. That's fine I guess, but I plan to reserve judgment for until AFTER I give it a chance, which is when judgment should be passed.

[Parker]

So I watched about half an hour of gameplay and the amount of violence was completely blown out of proportion. Some of the execution scenes are a little gruesome but overall the game doesn't seem any worse than something like GTA or Saints Row. If the game took a more realistic approach to violence it may be different, but as it stands now where you can kill hundreds of people, take multiple shots, refill your health and all the game stuff, it doesn't make a very big impact. 

 

So yet again, people making a big deal over nothing. 

 

 

Parker

[PleaseHoldOn]

So I watched about half an hour of gameplay and the amount of violence was completely blown out of proportion.

 

I don't think it's the violence that really had people up in arms, persay.  It was how the game was advertised pandering to the angry loner types that shoot up schools and malls.  Something you really don't see with GTA or Saint's Row, which are generally masked in movie-styled over the top action and humor... and don't make things quite as "real".

Edited June 1, 2015 by PleaseHoldOn

[Parker]

I don't think it's the violence that really had people up in arms.  It was how the game was advertised pandering to the angry loner types that shoot up schools and malls.  Something you really don't see with GTA or Saint's Row, which are generally masked in over the top action and humor... and don't make things quite as "real".

 

True, however the game itself comes across just like GTA or Saint's Row because it isn't realistic at all. It is absolutely nothing like the trailer and just comes across as a silly shooter with a goofy & violent mechanic that is the executions. 

 

 

Parker

[PleaseHoldOn]

True, however the game itself comes across just like GTA or Saint's Row because it isn't realistic at all. It is absolutely nothing like the trailer and just comes across as a silly shooter with a goofy & violent mechanic that is the executions. 

 

I think if the game came out without those months of people analyzing and scrutinizing that gameplay/premise trailer, which was nothing more than shameless pot stirring and pandering to said angry loners with an axe to grind... it really wouldn't be on anyones radar.  Because it is just a goofy twin stick shooter.

 

Edit: But that's why it got the attention it did, and to a certain extent, I don't think it was unwarranted considering what they were advertising and how they did it.

Edited June 1, 2015 by PleaseHoldOn

[BlindMango]

The whole story around this game is pretty interesting, this is a game that has gameplay that is just okay. It's nothing amazing, just a twin-stick shooter game with very minimal objectives and an annoying checkpoint system. It has cool things like its destruction system along with its art style, but that's about all it has going for it.

 

Basically, this is a simply "okay" game as far as an overall rating goes for it, and it would be just another game that would have probably gone mostly under the radar if it weren't for these "journalists" at these idiotic blogging websites like Kotaku and Polygon spinning up a controversy over it and pouring out these cringe-worthy clickbait articles that in effect made this game an overall successful one (I think it's in the top 3 on Steam right now). Those joke blogging sites are the ones that constantly participate in mediocre "outrage" articles that always borderline on parody and then it just always backfires on them, lol it's just so entertaining to see it happen every single time.

 

I bet the developers of this game were banking on an outrage over this game which would result in sales and they most certainly got it! The funny thing is, I bet they were expecting an outrage from the mainstream media, not mediocre blogging websites like Polygon, so I bet they are laughing all the way to the bank with that.

 

My opinion on this game is that it's not for me, it doesn't look that great overall and it's just too dark and grim, not really something I'd enjoy at all. That being said, I'm all for it being able to be developed and sold, it's a free market and they should be allowed to do it!

Edited June 1, 2015 by BlindMango

[Stupid91]

I read all these comments before watching the trailer and everyone has made it out to be extremely terrible but to me it didn't seem all that bad. I most likely won't be buying it just for the fact that I like a game with a great story. Yeah the graphics didn't seem all that but who cares. I could run around on watchdogs or gta killing every innocent person in my way so to me this game seems no different. Too many people are quick to judge a game before giving it a chance.

[PleaseHoldOn]

I could run around on watchdogs or gta killing every innocent person in my way so to me this game seems no different.

 

I do feel like the comparisons to GTA and Watch_Dogs and Saint's Row are a little off base.  This game is clearly trying to send a different message, however uninteresting as that message may be.

[Parker]

I do feel like the comparisons to GTA and Watch_Dogs and Saint's Row are a little off base.  This game is clearly trying to send a different message, however uninteresting as that message may be.

 

I disagree. The trailers are promoting different things, sure, but the actual products are nothing but goofy and completely unrealistic violence that people blow way out of proportion. The voice acting and actual lines are also delivered in such a way that it is hard to take seriously, so much so that I think the developers intended it to be taken as a joke.

 

 

Parker

[PleaseHoldOn]

I disagree. The trailers are promoting different things, sure, but the actual products are nothing but goofy and completely unrealistic violence that people blow way out of proportion. The voice acting and actual lines are also delivered in such a way that it is hard to take seriously, so much so that I think the developers intended it to be taken as a joke.

 

Guess I may just be placing a bit too much on the trailers, but that's really all I've seen of Hatred and have to go by.

 

Joke or not, I understand why Hatred is getting a red flag for how it advertised itself (which is the difference to me between it and recent, less controversial iterations of GTA).  Understanding, of course, they have every right to create any game they like.

Edited June 1, 2015 by PleaseHoldOn

[coldkillaaaaaaaa]

I disagree. The trailers are promoting different things, sure, but the actual products are nothing but goofy and completely unrealistic violence that people blow way out of proportion. The voice acting and actual lines are also delivered in such a way that it is hard to take seriously, so much so that I think the developers intended it to be taken as a joke.

 

 

Parker

 

Concept, and execution of concept are two completely different things, mechanically and fundamentally GTA and Hatred are two completely different games

[hyappatuhyakuchu]

Corny af.

[Sikatiiker]

Seemed like a fun little shitstorm when it arrived but I heard as a game it was just barely average.

[xzero4812]

Gamespot review

 

http://www.gamespot.com/reviews/hatred-review/1900-6416157/

 

 

 Hatred is too repetitive to be exciting, too dumb to be frightening, too basic for you to feel accomplished at its end, too dour to be violently cathartic, too self-serious to engender ironic amusement, and yet still too childish to matter.

[Hailst0rm_2]

That's because it's a top-down shooter with arcade-esque detail which literally means it's outdated and can afford "destruction" on such a small scale, it'd be much more difficult for a game like GTA to elaborately demonstrate each level of detail to be torn apart, unless you want it done in a sloppy way where it just randomly pops into tiny rubble lol, besides GTAs entire world is interactive and far from bland, Rockstar are the kings at making worlds, to say it's bland doesn't even make sense, c'mon hail, stop trolling mang  

LOL 

GTA is still superior in every other aspect. Hatred is an indie game being sold at a fraction of the cost the amount of content offered isn't even comparable.

But when you want to go on a killing spree, which is Hatreds focus, GTA loses a lot of its interactivity. There are a lot of fake buildings that can't be entered, and destruction is limited to vehicles and some road props. 

I don't think Hatred is outdated at all, under the layers of chromatic aberration and thick film grain obscuring everything (Modding that BS out ASAP) its actually using Unreal Engine 4 which is what allows it to have all these fine details and destruction.

[coldkillaaaaaaaa]

LOL 

GTA is still superior in every other aspect. Hatred is an indie game being sold at a fraction of the cost the amount of content offered isn't even comparable.

But when you want to go on a killing spree, which is Hatreds focus, GTA loses a lot of its interactivity. There are a lot of fake buildings that can't be entered, and destruction is limited to vehicles and some road props. 

I don't think Hatred is outdated at all, under the layers of chromatic aberration and thick film grain obscuring everything (Modding that BS out ASAP) its actually using Unreal Engine 4 which is what allows it to have all these fine details and destruction.

 

Yeah, the amount of interiors you can enter are limited because that'd be literally thousands of interiors which would take forever to develop with Rockstars approach to game design, they wouldn't just do copy/paste interiors, so frankly it's better to have a limited amount of stores each with their own unique feeling and design as opposed to the same copy/paste as so many other open world develops do with their interiors, namely Ubisoft, Bethesda (although this is less frequent with Fallout), and Volition. Besides, if we're talking only about destructive interactivity, then yeah it's also limited but the car's destruction is so detailed down to the tiniest scratches, along with tiny jolts of electricity popping out after you run into light poles, etc..you wont see this sort of detail with Hatred even though the destruction is much more expansive. Also, Rage > Unreal, 1v1 fite me

[Hailst0rm_2]

Yeah, the amount of interiors you can enter are limited because that'd be literally thousands of interiors which would take forever to develop with Rockstars approach to game design, they wouldn't just do copy/paste interiors, so frankly it's better to have a limited amount of stores each with their own unique feeling and design as opposed to the same copy/paste as so many other open world develops do with their interiors, namely Ubisoft, Bethesda (although this is less frequent with Fallout), and Volition. Besides, if we're talking only about destructive interactivity, then yeah it's also limited but the car's destruction is so detailed down to the tiniest scratches, along with tiny jolts of electricity popping out after you run into light poles, etc..you wont see this sort of detail with Hatred even though the destruction is much more expansive. Also, Rage > Unreal, 1v1 fite me

Its far easier to focus on a game that does one thing good than create one that does many. lol GTA destruction is good where its enabled but you're not going to see bricks flying off the walls or driving through stores and apartments like Hatred. I don't own Hatred so I have no idea how much variation it has for interiors but it just looks like fun to be able to do those things.

and dude, Rage doesn't even support DX12 It probably will by its next iteration though.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Hailst0rm_2