In all fairness the game is set at a time when things like this were common. It's no different to going to war and killing thousands of people on a battlefield.
- 3
DD#16 disgusting
- Thread starter Redhead
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
What happened in the Middle Ages is so far removed from modern sensibilities that it's hard for modern and educated people to grasp the medieval mindset because fear, ignorance, xenophobia and religious fanaticism was pretty much the order of the day back then.
Although you could say that those sort of things still happens in parts of the world today.
Although you could say that those sort of things still happens in parts of the world today.
- 2
I think it is. There is a sort of anonymity and abstraction. You know you're killing people, but you don't go into the details. The point of war is somewhere else, the killing is just a means. The satisfaction of winning a war is not, should not be, the fact that you managed to kill people. This torture thing seems to be an end in itself.
I doesn't shock me really, it won't prevent me from playing. But in all honesty I don't find it interesting at all, and yes, I confess, kinda bad taste, sort of appealing to the vilest pulsions of the players.
I love CK2 because it's a highly complex and sophisticated game, it's about the macro-strategy, about managing kingdoms and empires. I honestly don't see were detailing torture procedures fits into this.
I don't mind the roleplaying element at all, but I don't like the direction it's taking (even this cat thing... not too sure...)
I would rather have been presented with roleplaying stuff a little more related to intricate intrigues, leadership dilemmas, tortuous love affairs, than choosing how I'm going to torture some dude, or if I'm letting the cat in for the night...
- 4
- 1
Hey! Cannibalism isn't all that ba- Oh you mean in the game… yeah, sickening.
- 5
last time i heard, virtual Chianti and fava beans are at bargain prices!
- 1
Can I interest anyone in lady fingers ? Finger lickin' good. It's a wonderful dessert after a meal of a human liver replete with Chianti and fava beans.
oh the OP is serious. 1000% serious, and 1000000% triggered! it's like our own beautiful corner of tumblr.
Out of curiosity would you be more okay with torture in the game if it was presented in a vaguer/more abstracted fashion?
- 1
actually... yes.
The decision to execute a prisoner is a political decision. Even the decision to torture him or her could be seen as political as well, as intimidation or reprisal destined to assert your domination and dissuade dissent.
But for me, a simple: will you have the prisoner tortured? yes/no would have been more than enough. Details on the torture itself with background sound effects of bones being crushed and limbs being ripped off bodies do not add anything at all, in my opinion, to the meaning of such decision in the context of a game about macro medieval rulership
It's not that I am going to faint or anything if playing with that DLC, but I just regret the work and energy that has been put into it was not devoted to enriching the game with stuff slightly more intellectually stimulating than that
Last edited:
- 5
- 4
- 1
Well, I mean I suppose we should also not have descriptions of assassinations, and multitude of other flavoured events that are quite gruesome, following your logic.
Thanks for the answer, follow up question: is this more of a taste/prefer-if-they-focused-elsewhere thing for you or more of a morality thing?
- 1
Morality? no... I consider myself a discerning grown-up man and I feel my gaming universe is a universe where I don't feel compelled to exercise morality, precisely because it's all about unreality and fantasy, and that nobody ever gets hurt, even if I play Hitler or Genghis Khan. Regarding that issue, there is no more morality in waging war against a neighbouring country for the sake of one's own delusions of grandeur than in torturing someone for fun. Anyone that enjoys stepping in the shoes of any medieval ruler ( as I do) can put morality aside as an argument for their game preferences.
So, yes, it's basically disappointment at the content of the DLC. What I look for in my games is intellectual stimulation and roleplaying enjoyment. I honestly don't see how this torture DLC can claim to bring any depth to the game, and roleplaying a sadists or an executioner is not my idea of fun.
Now, to come back to the morality issue, I confess it's not totally absent from my judgement. I think that unfortunately not everybody is capable of taking their distances with what is represented in the game, and there is an evil part in humans (more particularly in males, I would say) that hankers for competition and confrontation, to the point of sometimes revelling in violence and brutality. I cannot but think, when I see some dudes playing First Person Shooter games ( that I personally consider a vile and utterly uninteresting waste of time) that they are actually just enjoying a poor man's substitute for the real thing.
So, yes, I think that producing a game ( or an element of a game) about torture is not, per se, totally inoffensive and maybe it would have been, let's say, more elegant to work on something a little more elevated or refined, more in tune with the outstanding qualities of the game, and that offered the players a slightly more dignified kind of fun.
- 4
- 2
- 1
Well man, I disagree with basically everything you just said BUT it's a handy and interesting perspective to gain insight on so thanks for indulging me.
- 1
Put a stop to it! Everyone knows that the video game will cause those weak minded players to go out and do it in real life! It's all Grand Theft Auto's fault! Stop the violence!
- 2
you're welcome. Civilised contradictory debate is a healthy food for the brain. What are, may I ask, your objections to my position, so that this discussion can be mutually enriching?
Last edited:
if that is an interpretation of what I said, it's a very deficient one.
I just say that the fun that players can get from virtually torturing people is not of the same register than the fun players get out of intellectually stimulating challenges, may they be set in historically violent contexts. And that personally, I give may preference to the second.
BTW, regarding GTA ( not the topic I was discussing) I don't know if you have kids. I do. If you feel that letting them play a game consisting of running over or shooting innocent passersby generates the same kind of healthy entertainment as playing chess, for example, I recommend to you the works of Michel Desmurget, PhD in neuroscience and director of research at the French National Institute of health and Medical Reseach (INSERM) . He has compiled a few hundred academic studies on the effects of violence on TV and video games on children and young adolescents. If you have any counter-evidence, you should transmit it to him.
- 5
- 3
You know, all these people who argue against violence in video games and things like that often leave me wondering if they can actually tell difference between real life and video game...
- 8
- 1
Anyone who can't is clinically a psychopath, which is not exceedingly frequent, thank God.
The issue is a lot more nuanced than that
- 3