The lights are on
Prior to the highly anticipated launch of Treyarch's Call of Duty: Black Ops, animation director Dominique Drozdz said in an interview that Black Ops' new facial animation system and realistic visuals made the team feel that some of the more violent scenes have gone a bit too far. Our very own Adam Biessener said in his Black Ops review that Treyarch crossed the line in terms of violence as the game "pushes the lines of good taste."
"The campaign puts players neck deep in the close-up brutality of combat. Limbs shatter disgustingly as bullets rip apart flesh and bone. Gore flies in all directions as combatants are popped like meat balloons by the vicious weaponry of the ‘60s. In one uncomfortable sequence, the player has to torture a restrained prisoner. This is an emphatically mature game (in the ESRB sense, anyway). Everyone should make their own judgment on what they are comfortable with, but Black Ops crossed my personal line in its bloody depictions of violence, particularly the torture sequence. I wasn’t able to compartmentalize it as enjoyable cartoon violence like I have with so many games over the years. Call me a wuss if you want, but the realistic gore is distasteful in the absence of a discussion of what should be a careful decision to employ lethal force. I realize that Treyarch isn’t trying to put on a morality play here, but Black Ops pushes the lines of good taste."
What do you think? Did the amount of graphic violence in Black Ops make you uncomfortable? Was it even necessary? Or are these graphic depictions of violence just an element of the war experience that we should expect in a game like this? Share your thoughts on the matter in the comments section below.
its what our solders see in war. you cant change war to something pretty. the disterbing parts are the real face of war
my friend says he's played it and says he was gettin tourtured or didnt even see a tourture level.one or the other
Lol. I know that this is pretty old. But I think that Adam is a wuss. If you don't like the gore, there is a nifty button for turning off blood, gore, and cursing. By the way, there are many more guns that are worse. ahem... Doom, Resident Evil, those are two I thought of right off the bat, and I know that there are many more. Adam the Wuss, should not have complained about it in the review, it feels like he was judging the game off of its violence. Now I feel like the violence affected the score, and that's something that should never happen...Ahem, GTA: San Andreas, rated perfect 10 by game informer. Killing civies, sex, drugs, cussing, and lots more.
This is old but I just want to point out that yes this is the kind of thing our soldiers see all the time but I for one am not going to go into the military. It's these kind of experiences that cause PTSD and the like and I for one don't want to experience that. On the other hand that's why I use the filter. :P Also, Gears of War and Dead Space are way more violent than Black Ops but they aren't nearly as realistic and that's the distinction that Adan was making. But still, if you are going to complain about violence in Black Ops why don't you have a problem with it in Condemned? I won't play Condemned or Bulletstorm because they don't have filters. CONSISTENCY PLEASE!!!!
It's rated M for a reason lol. I don't think theres anything wrong with the amount of violence in a game as long as it's rated appropriately.
black ops is a very violent game, but with games like Gears/God of War, Mortal kombat and left 4 dead on the market you really have to think about what is too violent. Black ops is no run through mushroom kingdom but there are other games that are obviously not for little kids, just because of all of the blood and gore.