My Impressions of Hatred and the Fiasco Surrounding It

Hatred. A strong word to be sure, but a word associated nowadays in the video game industry with a game of the same name. The game in question was one that saw a near instant removal from Steam because of the controversy over the game's premise. After seeing the first initial trailer for Hatred, I can understand the apprehension many people have. It's violent, vitriolic, and somewhat uncomfortable to watch. Unfortunately for Steam, this resulted in a huge backlash resulting in Steam reinstating Hatred on Greenlight. Gabe Newell followed up with an apology by admitting that "it wasn't a good decision". Since then, Hatred hasn't made much news aside from passing Greenlight and having a release date of Q2 2015. I fully believe that this whole fiasco was one big mess. Many people blew a lot of points about this story completely out of proportion. In my opinion, this could have been a lot worse, but overall this game is nothing to be worried over.

After watching the first trailer, it quickly dawned on me that this is a game that should not be taken seriously. I'm not overly fond of the idea that genocide is the main goal of the game, but the premise is why I can't look at Hatred as this new step for creative initiative in video games. I couldn't help but chuckle at the monologue, too. Lines like, "I just f****** hate this world and the human worms feasting on its carcass" and "It's time for me to kill and it's time for me to die" gives me the impression that Hatred is incredibly basic in its ideas. You have a no-name character whose sole objective is to kill everyone he sees until he is taken down and...that's it. There is nothing further to explain about Hatred's premise. It is this simple of a concept that got many a person's blood boiling.

I wholeheartedly understand. Genocide is a touchy subject. It is barely used in pop culture more or less mentioned in the news. The most recent use of genocide in pop culture that I can recall off the top of my head was the movie Rampage. Rampage (believe it or not) was written, directed, and produced by Uwe Boll. If the name sounds familiar, gamers should know it well as this is the same man behind a variety of video game film adaptations that includes House of the Dead and Alone in the Dark. Gamers should also know that those films are utter garbage. Surprisingly, Rampage had the opposite effect for a number of critics as the movie has the most positive reviews out of all of Uwe Boll's filmography.

So what does that say about a film being able to use genocide as its main appeal and actually get an above average number of positive reviews, yet when a video game attempts it, it gets taken down? Remember that Uwe Boll is the one behind Rampage. The same Uwe Boll behind the BloodRayne and Far Cry films. Rampage also had a sequel. I have a theory on this.

I think that this has a lot more to do with Steam more so haphazardly taking down the game in less than a day because of the game's premise drawing so much negative perception. In turn, this caused a huge uproar from gamers as this happened last year where Steam had problems regarding poorly made games passing Greenlight and gamers complaining about developer abuse of power. I think that the company was trying to save face from the negative publicity that Hatred amassed, but ended up causing even more resentment from Steam users. Maybe it was because Hatred looks like a finished game? This was the ultimate double-edged sword that Valve fell victim to on their own accord.

Whether or not it is indeed a finished game that performs well or is a repetitive and buggy mess remains to be seen. Outside of its performance as a game, it's the premise that has everyone talking. Like I said, I don't think this is a game to worry about in today's world. If this came out when Jack Thompson was still practicing law, he would have had a field day with it. That much is for certain. As for today, though, I can't see this getting as much traction in the industry as other subjects and games do. If Rampage didn't get that much media attention, I doubt Hatred will either.

Regarding people being impressionable and emulating what they see, it can't really be helped. People control what they create in entertainment; however, it's up to them what their limits are in the content that they are producing for the masses. Consumers of that entertainment control what they buy; however, depending on their mental faculties and understanding of fiction versus reality, it all depends on their upbringing and health. Then this brings us to the current debates. You'll have one side arguing for creative ambitions in art, while the other side argues that this has gone too far. I fall somewhere in the middle. I do believe that art has no limitation in any entertainment industry, but I will admit that there are some things that I don't perceive as art and that some subjects need to be handled with care.

Hatred's focus on genocide seems more like a cartoon parody of the subject. The trailer is very evident of that. It just seems so ridiculous and simplistic with its idea and character. While committing this particular kind of atrocity is the main push for the game, I will confess that it is disturbing with the NPCs scripted to beg for their lives while they are being mercilessly executed. I know I'm not going to buy it, but that doesn't mean no one else will.

Probably the core argument that may result in Hatred's debut as a product to be purchased is its overall contributions as a game. Will there be a lot of regret for buyers of it? Will people find the premise too uncomfortable to keep going? Will it have a high level of replayability or just fade away into the background? That third question is what has me intrigued. Games like Titanfall and Evolve have been criticized for lacking content and repetitive gameplay. Hatred hasn't revealed that much including its asking price. We only know of its premise and that it's single player. The possibility of an indie game being this basic getting that kind of criticism triple A games got is very likely.

So how will this narrative conclude? Will Hatred become a huge title on Steam like so many gamers believe it will? Is Hatred going to become a focus in games media because of its premise or has that ship sailed? Or heck, will Hatred barely sell that much at all? In any case, Hatred is on its way and some gamers are looking forward to it. While the idea of genocide being the sole gameplay function is a slippery slope with the rights for expression of game developers going against the limitations of subjects within the medium, I think that most people have a good enough perception to understand that the material is fiction. I do not believe that this will effect society at large either. Hatred is nothing more than a trivial game that has garnered a lot of expectations that could lead to its success or downfall.