Re:Why So Few Violent Games?
by cwyers on Wednesday July 02, 2014 @06:03PM
(#7980070)
And the two responses to my comment so far perfectly illustrate my confusion, I think:
> I believe his point is that we have violent games because it's a no-brainer. You don't have to be creative, you don't have to sweat to find an appealing game mechanic, and it sells.
AND
> All of the things mentioned in the article have been justifications used to explain why games about social dynamics haven't happened.
Is the author's premise that games focused on social dynamics are just as easy to make as games focused on violence, and that we have to back-fit justifications to fit it? Or is it that games focused on social dynamics really are harder?
> I believe his point is that we have violent games because it's a no-brainer. You don't have to be creative, you don't have to sweat to find an appealing game mechanic, and it sells.
AND
> All of the things mentioned in the article have been justifications used to explain why games about social dynamics haven't happened.
Is the author's premise that games focused on social dynamics are just as easy to make as games focused on violence, and that we have to back-fit justifications to fit it? Or is it that games focused on social dynamics really are harder?