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.
I think the gore added to the feel of the game; a dark, grizzly war. After reading the review I was expecting the torture sequence to be a lot worse than it was, but it was short and I didn't think it was very bloody. Some people may have problems with it but that's why you can turn it off. Basically, I like what Treyarch did with the campaign.
Until we see actual footage of the graphic nature of real war I don't think it's going too far. It's just a video game.
Is Saving Private Ryan too violent? Is Black Hawk Down too violent? Video game violence should be compared to all other forms of media entertainment.
So with that in mind, no Black Ops is far from too violent. It's a war game showcasing how devastating and gruesome war really is.
Black ops looks like something from 2007...how can you call it too realistic?
There are worse games than this. But at a certain point, it's unnecessary. If a game is too violent, with creative ways of killing people, then all that means is the developer is a sicko.
N one really complained about CoD: World at War being violent. They both have arms and head flying off people. If you very sensitive too see violent action, then yes it is too violent. If you're not sensitive at all to[ violent action, then no, it's not too violent. It all depends on what the person reacts to the violence.
Its historical !
thats how shi was man
I thought the game was great. The graphic violence caught me off guard, but I didn't think badly about it. Ya, I said, "Oh my god that is amazing." "Wow his leg came off." This game became more realistic. It's also a reality check about wars, how intense they can get. I do believe we should expect this in a game.
The only thing that seemed to make me twitch was the throat slicing scene. Oh and the axe to the back to that guard by Sergei!
No it was not too violent.