Deleted

[Deleted]

 

I'd prefer for the character to be irredeemably evil, but in a Snidely Whiplash kinda way.
Not so much "set off a chemical weapon in a train station" evil.
More like, "take over an orphanage and siphon all the funding while cackling maniacally, recreating a kind of Oliver Twist situation" evil.
Also, kitten/puppy forced labor stations. Yes.

 

Kittens make great labor, 'cause you only have to pay them pennies an hour. If they act up and start demanding higher wages, you just send their butts to the pound!
Plus, their little paws are great at sewing sneakers.

 

I think you need to come up with a different game.

 

Why?

 

Look at a game called Evil Genius.

It is on steam for 9.99 USD

It is basically what you are describing but more PG / Teen rated.

Aim for that.

PS. allot of people want a Evil Genius 2.

 

I saw full evil if you are okay with it.

Although the orphanage and kitten thing would be cool too.

Just depends on the crowd you want to play the game, but I think most people that would want to play an "evil" game are not going to be as concerned with the level of evil.

But, it is best to give the person lots of options so they can be as evil as they choose.

 

I loved part 1...........may have to look into this.

http://evilgenius2.com/

http://www.rebellion.co.uk/games/evil-genius-online

 

Look, if you are not going with the cartoon evil (like in Evil Genius) and instead want to make a "realistic evil character" you have to take into consideration the true nature of evil:

- An evil person doesn't consider himself/herself as evil. In fact, they consider themselves heroes and leaders (in the worse cases they consider themselves as a necesary evil).
- If they are megalomaniacs instead of simple psychos they won't dirty themselves with minor crimes or innecesary violence, everything must have a purpose or at least a good excuse.

Examples could be a dictator, a violent revolutionary leader or a secret organization like the Illuminatti.

So if you are going with a realistic evil character try to take this into account because everything else is in risk of looking cartoony and exaggerated.

 

It's a good idea, just misaligned, look at Despicable Me, those villains are indeed evil, but in a comedic and interesting way that doesn't cross the line into terrorism.

The OP needs to do is adjust his focus from Terrorism Tycoon to Villain Sim. Villains are fun, terrorists, not so much.

 

What does the GTA and Saints Row games fall into?

 

I'll echo the others. Why?

I think you should allow the player to be as evil as they want fitting in with the theme and style of the game. Whether you go cartoony route (Evil Genius) or something more realistic.

 

Evil can work if it's done with comedic undertones. This works especially well with bumbling, inept villains.

I'd also say it's easier to get away with evil directed toward the privileged (banks, mega-corporations, adult white males) rather than the weak or oppressed.

Personally, I wouldn't allow the player to blow up a children's hospital or torture an elderly woman even though those might be considered the types of actions that would approach the "pinnacle" of evil. They would just make a lot of players uncomfortable I think. Even players that enjoy "playing the bad guy".

 

That's racist. We don't need the US Republican / Democrat and American News Mass Media stupidity dynamic in the forums.

Look at Home Alone. It's comedic solely because you know the boy will escape. Or the 'I Love Lucy' where the evil, simple lies told simply to try and fit in and be successful like her husband or landlord neighbors, was ineptly endearing.

Myself, I'm consciously trying to make my games not evil so I Love Lucy is endearing. I'll have conscious modify enemy behavior as competition for resources rather than physical attack on the protagonist. That's pretty much what you have to do to get a rating suitable for a young child although I'm intentionally not 'targeting' a demographic as the mass media does. They typically target males 18 - 34 1st with all others an afterthought. So that's a lot of after thoughts.

 

Really? It should be up to the player what they decide they want to do if its built into the game. If it makes them uncomfortable then they don't need to do it.

Evil also shows no prejudice.

 

Racial, ethnic, religious, and class prejudices are used to buy votes and sell media. That's why they're always trying to egg it on. In real life it's very rare. It's that simple really.

When bad behavior can't be distinguished on one of those criteria of race, ethnicity, religion, and class the infraction is ignored as it doesn't win votes or sell newspapers. So Homer Simpson walloped Krusty the Clown? Who cares? It won't wins votes for any political affiliation.

Prejudice against diseases, filth, drug abuse, and threatening behavior is another matter though. Those prejudices are armed with truth and experience. One that doesn't instinctively react to avoid and against such threats isn't thinking right.

 

We're talking about a game. Not the real world.

 

What? First you respond to a post that mentions integrating real world abuses into it and then you try to out from my post by saying we are talking about a game not the real world.

Such a game and this thread's post both you and I commented on is attempting to coop the 'real world' for use to sell the 'game world'. My post is relevant and your argument trying to negate my post is wrong.

Prejudice is an abused word - prejudice is the equivalent of making the decisions to live life into old age safely, healthily, and with as little violence and conflict as possible, if one purports to be civilized.

 

Yes I did respond to a post with real world issues. You can take real world issues and put them in the game but it doesn't affect anyone in real life. Hence it being a game and not the real world. If he wants to make a statement of somekind then fair enough be he isn't going that route.

Evil still doesn't show any prejudice. Evil/bad people/whatever the F*** will go after whatever/whomever suits their needs most. You brought in all the other S*** about politics and stuff and somehow suggesting that including it means I'm not thinking right.

Possibly in the context of the game the bad guy isn't going to discriminate against someone who has cancer versus someone with crohns unless one is more exploitable and reaps a higher reward than the other. It isn't a case of which is worse it'll be which suits their end goal the most. Money, number of deaths whatever.

I got to laugh while playing Defcon nuking millions of people and locking a sim in a room and watch them piss themselves to death. It's fun, it's a game.

 

As others have said, go with comedic evil. Avoid outright murder, especially kids. Think cartoon villains and 80's movie rich bad guys.

 

Well, there's really a design issue that needs to be addressed first. Allowing reprehensible actions is totally different from requiring reprehensible actions to progress in the game. If players are allowed to blow up a children's hospital, that's one thing. If the game tells them that is their goal, that gets into very dangerous territory.

Even in the first case, perception of the appropriateness of even allowing that might depend on other factors, like repercussions vs rewards for committing those evil actions.

But as others have said, how realistic these games are and how human the characters seem will also determine a lot about how the evil is perceived.

As for evil not showing prejudice, I'm not sure that I agree with that. Many people cite Hitler as the archetypal example of evil and many of his actions were based entirely and fundamentally on prejudice.

 

You can always put it in the hands of the player:

In Grand Theft Auto, I can steal a car, pick up a hooker, have my way with her, kick her out, run her over, and take my money back.

Or I could just go bowling ...

 

The thing I learned is the more cartoonish, the more carnage-ish. Look at Japanese manga, they almost get away with a whole bunch of adult like things in cartoon form.
Also, use assumptions, like if you ARE going to blow up a school, do it on a Saturday. People will assume there's no one inside, but janitors.

I think there is most likely a non-mainstream market for things like this.

 

So you make it a sandbox and give the player the choice of what they get to do. If they want to do "x" they can if they don't they don't then they can do something else.

Aye you can pick a specific example to show discrimination but evil isn't an isolated case.

 

I don't often take a hard stance on matters like these, but I have surrounded myself in my daily life with enough diverse people to know that you are a fool if you think those prejudices aren't real.

Take some real time to get to know people of color, the poor, the homeless, Muslims, etc. and if you manage to get beyond the superficial conversation and really get them to open up about their daily struggles, you will see things differently.

Anyway, my apologies to the OP for this thread getting hijacked into a political discussion.

 

They're also great with a nice bottle of red. Pan fried, bit of garlic, yum.

My understanding of the phrase 'evil shows no predjudice' is that absolutely everyone, regardless of race, colour or creed, is capable of evil.

Or do both and call it an eventful night out

 

You can do outright evil. Although, it does get a little dicey depending on the actions you're doing in game. Taking GTA as an example, the game allows you to beat up and murder a hooker. In the real world, it created a lot of controversy. But on the flip side, controversy can help you sell and market a game. Case in point, Carmageddon was very controversial in the day because you can run over wee little old ladies. Everyone remembers the game years later and the controversy. So much so that the game keeps popping back up on everyone's radar. Right now, there is an app version of the game, it's up on Steam and GOG. What I'm getting at is controversy sells. You have to be ready for the storm ahead.

But if you want greater appeal, cartoonish violence is always fun and people always love stupid and dumb. That's why things like Goat Simulator gets a lot of press. Stupid also sells.

 

In regards to the OP, you have to be mindful of what makes sense within the confines of your game and the demographic you're targeting. You should generally steer clear of anything involving children being hurt, not good karma at all. And if you do allow a busy school to be blown up it better come with some serious butthurt for the player responsible.

Other than that it's all about the right context and allowing the player free will to choose. If there's a point to what they're doing and you get the balance of severity and good taste right you should be ok.

 

What those stupid car games you pointed out prove is that businesses can be evil if they think they can get away with it and make money doing so. It doesn't make it morally acceptable; laws or religions or lack of those aside.

if you think you can well then simply recall the early iOS game from the Dutchman were you simply shook a crying baby.

Uh, a game that runs over wee little old ladies is stupid, dumb and evil. 'Cartoonish' violence or not.

 

Yeah I don't think there are any school buses at all in GTA. Nor are there many, if any, children on the streets. It's very interesting to see what boundaries GTA tries to push. Going on a mass killing spree? Ok! As long as they're > 18.

They push sexist lines very hard, and what they do can easily be considered offensive. Just ask Hillary!

When it comes to race, it's a somewhat different story, but quite important in their plots. GTA San Andreas had mostly black people as the main characters, and GTA IV centered strongly around the Russians. They'll often poke fun of races in a stereotypical sort of way, but imo they manage to keep it light-hearted enough that not too many people get offended. It's a fine line.

And it's a very funny world we live in.

 

Hello, as a child lived in the projects and collected used hypodermic needles on the project lawns left behind by drug abusers. Invited to belong to gangs and rejected. Invited to use drugs by friends' parents and peers and rejected that. I have had a knife held to my stomach. I have known personally murder and accident victims. To name just a few things. And I have friends from various religions because of the abuses in their homelands by their own governments not because I made any decisions to inflict suffering on them. That's why I'm in America too.

The false indignation against my posts when we have all these war games and war movies and real wars isn't laudable in the least.

I didn't highjack any thread: odd, the OP asks how evil one can make a game and yet when you bring up issues in the real world some people suddenly can't be patronizing fast enough.

Personally I prefer other things in games then yet more violence and evil.

 

OK, kill file. The brainless meme trolls are out.

 

I never said it was morally right. I'm saying that a controversial game tends to stick in the public's minds a lot longer and if you want that kind of attention, go for it. I also mentioned that you have to be able to take the heat if you're going to do that. To reiterate, if you can't handle the potential controversy and you don't have the thick skin for it, go cartoonish. That was my actual point.

And I honestly thought I posted this with the original quote by Goat. iPads make posting things a little interesting on my end.

 

So we not only have to endure your S***ty posts, we have to endure your S***ty life story too?

Someone close this thread please.

 

Sounds fun to me

 

Yeah, asking people's opinions on things like this is a bad idea, because you get a wide array of differing opinions like you see in this thread. Really you can go either way and be equally as successful, it just depends on how and to whom you market yourself. The worst thing to do is to water down your vision so you can appeal to everyone. Take a hard line stance and stick with it, you will gather a core audience that way. Otherwise you will make a game that interests no one.

 

Oh please! A game isn't evil.

Sounds like you'd be better off suited over on tumblr.

 

And if the game had you running over little kids, instead of little old ladies, would your argument stay the same?

 

Make it funny, outrageous, and you will be fine. Example being GTA, while controversial at times, because it is outrageous and funny, it got away with it. Another example is Postal and its sequel Postal 2 - where the main objective of the game is to massacre common people in the most brazen and degrading manner - and now this game series has a cult following. If you want to play it safe, go with Evil Genius cartoonish "evil".

The history of video game (and the violence, or the morality of it) is linked to the some of the highest grossing games. Mortal Kombat, Doom, GTA, Postal just to name a few that in various times had enraged some section of the general population.

I wouldn't worry too much about it. If your game is too offensive, congradulation! It is free publicity and you just created a cult following and found your niche!

Okay, I just read your last paragraph... I must say, since you live in AMERICA - particularly Texas, where a lot of school shootings happened, I think making a game like this is just asking for it. If you don't mind to be jail for conspiracy to commit terrorism and spend the rest of your life in Guantanamo bay, then do it!

The problem is american society's double standards view on these issues - you are allow to show these on TV and Movies (eg. 24), but you are definitely not allow to create this in game. Also on the double standards on how "terrorism" is portrayed - nuking countries where billions will die is A-OKAY in Defcon, but if you create the game like you said, I am pretty certain you will be jailed or at least be monitored 24/7 for the rest of your life by FBI/DHS and be on their watchlist.

Should you risk it? I don't know, do you like to go to jail or be watched 24/7 by a van park outside your house for the rest of your life? That's the question you should ask.

 

Things involving children are generally considered too far, and as bawss said, might have big brother keeping a nice, happy eye on you.

Regarding the train station, there was a scene in Call of Duty 2 where you traveled through an airport, and gunned down innocent civilians as a terrorist:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_surrounding_Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_2

Though I think there was also a way to get through it without hurting anyone innocent.

Another thing to consider is that the app stores have their own guidelines as to what is tolerable. They generally have more restritive rules than those for PC and console.

 

You can be as evil as you want, but there's social lines you just can't cross without people saying "f-off" and schools/kids are one of those lines.

 

But 47% of people here thought it was ok ...

 

Not just the school, that idea of "chemical agent in train stations" is straight out of the terrorist handbook ("Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway by Aum Shinrikyo" where 13 died and over 6000 poisoned and is consider one of the worst terrorist attack in Japanese history). That's kinda crossed the line too. Its kinda of like suggesting flying a plane into buildings. In the post 911 world we live in, suggesting these kind of stuff is a virtual warrant for FBI/DHS/CIA to waterboard you.

I don't think America is ever going to left 911 behind. 911 joke is still a taboo. So even if you try to make any of these things funny, they sure aren't going to laugh when these 3-letter-agencies visit you.... and I am not even joking because I remember reading about news of kids that were writing "fantasy" about these kind of stuff and put it on facebook/blog posts and they got arrested for it.

The airport massacre scene was only consider "acceptable" because it was not commited on America - but on one of America's "enemies". This is where double standards apply - as long as despicable act is depicted NOT in America, but especially in "enemies of America" (or any of the third world countries) then everything is A-OKAY!

 

as gameseizer_10that's why americans always be a protagonist in every media. do we ever see a european or asian or african hero in aaa titles?

as gameseizer_00: shut up. you are talking off topic.

 

Americans consume about as many games as every other country combined:
http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countries-spending-most-on-console-and-computer-game.html

You get to be the protagonist when you're footing the bill.

 

dude, games like saw and gta aren't evil?

 

I think evil for the sake of "evil" sounds too cartoonish.
Real evil comes from opportunism and ruthless pursuit of selfish goals while disregarding wellbeing of other fellow humans.
So go with running sweat shops, selling chemical/nuclear/bio weapons to terrorists and that kinda stuff.

 

I agree JovanD, Zionmoose I think you are forgetting the primary objective of making your game FUN and entertaining. Don't do "evil" for evil's sake. Now it makes it sound like that's all there is to it - it is now just a gimmick. It is kind of like those gore-fest/"shock" films where there is very little plot but just gore and more gore. Just think of it this way, if you are marketing this as a movie - you would be saying "the most EVIL movie in history" - does that sound entertaining or even remotely intriguing? It kinda just sound down right corny to me (and not in a good way).

Focus on how to make the game fun first. Focus on the game mechanics. "Evil" is an emotive word that is quite subjective so what you might think is "most evil" is probably not what others think is "most evil" so it not even a selling point.

Most people just like the idea of being a little "bad ass", not to be the Adolf Hitler. Make it fun, entertaining. There is another great example which is very similar to Evil Genius that I think you should look into : Dungeon Keeper. It is very similar in theme and mechanics - what it boils down to is essentially a construction/management game with you playing the bad guy. There is another game called Tropico which is kind of similar too with you playing the evil dictator. Try to innovate on the game mechanics side, not the gimmicky "most evil" game tagline.

 

My concern isn't just about what your game would `do to` other people but what it is doing to you. What's going on in your mind that you want to make a game that contains what you're self-describing as `evil`? Are you happy about that? Do you feel good about that? Are you at peace with yourself? I don't think you can create such a game without some degree of mental depravation. I feel much the same way about people who make games with lots of blood and violence and horror. Each to their own, but I'm more concerned about your mental health than I am about the game itself. I'm also a bit concerned about the apparent separation between your head and your heart, which would lead you to not have compassion for people who go through such horrors as school shootings and subway bombings etc.. where is your heart?