Opinion: Ultra-Violence And Sexism – Does Gaming Need To Grow Up?
Perhaps the most ludicrously ironic moment of this year’s E3 conference occurred during the centrepiece presentation of strikingly mature post-apocalyptic title The Last Of Us, when a gruesomely violent kill – clearly intended as a shocking, brutal moment encapsulating the game’s gritty, serious take on survival – was greeted by juvenile whoops and cheers from the assembled crowd.
It seems I wasn’t the only one to find this slightly jarring. Last week, in reaction to the sheer dominance of killing, battering and bloodshed among the gameplay and trailers of E3′s biggest showcases, Deus Ex developer Warren Spector was moved to remark that “the ultraviolence has to stop…and we have to stop loving it”. And Spector certainly wasn’t alone in commenting on this prevalence of murder and gore – nor the arguably immature celebration of it.
Another familiar criticism to rear its head in recent days has been the accusation that games are sexist in their depiction of women. Some have argued that the suggestion of sexual violence against Lara Croft in the forthcoming Tomb Raider reboot, and the vicious slaying of S&M nuns in the much-debated Hitman Absolution trailer, sum up gaming’s dispassionate attitude to violence against women. Others have suggested that the way in which Crystal Dynamics expect us to feel sorry for Ms Croft and “protect her” is not exactly something you would expect if we were talking about a male lead in a game.
All of these claims have been widely dismissed and ridiculed by fans in the past week, and sometimes not in the most pleasant of ways. When culture critic Anita Sarkeesian recently announced a Kickstarter project looking at gaming’s depiction of women, can you guess what a certain unpleasant bunch of angry of gamers did? They flooded her with hateful abuse, insults and death threats of course, all undercut with a vicious layer of misogyny. Nice.
Now, the first thing to say here is that as a passionate and dedicated enthusiast of gaming, I’m usually a staunch defender when it comes to the wild and often unfounded accusations that people make about our beloved medium. Only last week I was writing about how the recent controversy over Lara Croft being ‘raped’ was clearly blown out of all proportion, and I’m also happy to stand up and argue that the newly-released Lollipop Chainsaw – seen by some as a tacky, adolescent embodiment of both gaming’s rampant violence and sexism – should be accepted for exactly what it is: a deliberately ludicrous slice of knock-about, entertaining and tongue-in-cheek fun. Hell, you could even argue that it’s sending up oversexualisation and hack-and-slash gore. It’s certainly hard to take it too seriously.
However, with that initial disclaimer out of the way, let me also be blunt and spell out a couple of things I’ve been mulling over in the last few days. Firstly, I believe that Warren Spector may well have a point about the prevalence and presentation of violence in gaming. Secondly, I also believe that sexism is an issue with many mainstream games, even if recent controversies don’t quite provide the best examples.
When it comes to the issue of violence, like Spector I want to stress that I genuinely don’t buy the tiresome argument that playing violent video games makes people violent. Indeed, I’ve actively disputed such claims in the past. 
And I have no problem with the presence of violence in games per se. After all, many of my favourite titles (Condemned, Fallout 3 etc. ) contain moments of eye-watering brutality.
However, what I am slightly concerned about is the increasingly prominent glorification of gratuitous violence in gaming, and the way in which disturbing or unpleasant acts of brutality are so widely celebrated or trivialized.
It is ultimately the context, tone and presentation that are all key in determining what is tasteful, and what is not. And the truth is that some games go out of their way to make hideous, gratuitous violence look cool, while others present it in such a casually callous way that it beggars belief.
One particularly explicit recent example that springs to mind is the early stages of Silent Hill: Downpour, where the opening in-game tutorial demands that you stalk into a grimy prison shower-room and savagely murder a pleading, unarmed man.
So there you are: hacking away at this terrified, semi-naked bloke who is screaming and begging for his life – literally running around sobbing with a shank stuck in him at one point – and the whole thing is presented as some matter-of-fact ‘press this key to pick-up weapon; press this key to attack’ button guide. As a cutscene, it would probably have been somewhat more palatable. But making you murder some pathetic, defenceless nonce as a way of teaching you the controls? In my view, that’s utterly, disgustingly tasteless.
As noted by Spector, one of the major reasons why this matters is that it is easier for those looking to criticize, belittle or demonize gaming to do so when they are confronted by a mainstream landscape dominated by experiences in which you wound, maim and kill for entertainment or as a matter-of-course, especially when they also see crowds of fans cheering stylized throat-slits and head-shots. A journalist looking for a sensationalist article or a politician wishing to fuel a moral panic can easily latch onto this adolescent celebration of increasingly gratuitous and realistic violence, and claim that both games – and those who play them – are warped.
Does this mean that we should take issue with violence in games across the board? Of course not. But it should at least motivate us to think long and hard about the way in which it is presented, packed and perceived.
So what about the other aforementioned area where the games industry frequently runs into trouble? That of its oft-criticized depiction of women?
Well, while I would point out that allegations of sexism and mysoginy in games are often overcooked (as with the Lara Croft debacle), and that the more OTT sexualization of games such as Bayonetta should be taken with the stylized pinch of salt that their fantastical settings demand, at times I also have to concede that such concerns do carry substantial weight.
I think of games like Mafia II, purporting to be serious, grown-up exercises in storytelling, and note with regret the criminal lack of strong female characters, and the way in which every woman gets depicted either as a disposable sex-object or a helpless damsel-in-distress. There are exceptions of course – not least the complex and resilient heroines of BioWare’s output – but such lazy casting is quite typical in gaming across the board. 
It’s true that Hollywood blockbusters, pulpy novels and trashy TV shows also often pander to adolescent male fantasies of wanton violence and destruction, nihilistic consequence-free carnage and the interplay of butch, heroic guys and impossibly sexy, passive women. But the difference is that critically-acclaimed and supposedly higher-brow games do this too. And rather than see them as the dumb-but-fun exercises we probably should, many gamers and industry players actually applaud and celebrate this immaturity.
The point is, perhaps we shouldn’t be so swift to dismiss all the accusations that come the industry’s way. Even if 99 per cent of them are bullshit, there are always likely to be some criticisms that have some valid weight to them – especially when respected figures inside the industry are starting to speak out. We also have to recognise that the only way gaming is going to ultimately mature and evolve, is if we are willing to accept that it needs to.
There are certain companies out there who are working hard to help gaming grow up. Journey creators thatgamecompany, Dishonored devs Arkane Studios and Last Of Us supremos Naughty Dog are all seemingly attempting to push the medium into more serious, intelligent and thought-provoking territory. But so long as both industry professionals and fans alike continue to cheer and celebrate genuinely nasty, eye-widening kills that really should be making you flinch rather than grin, and so long as people throw misogynistic dirt at women who dare to suggest that gaming might actually have an issue with sexism, then our beloved medium is unlikely to be able to shake off its enduring and unfortunate image problem. And that ultimately does us all a great disservice.
Tomb Raider needs some damn violence. Have you seen the sales of the last 3 games. Legend, Underworld, and Anniversary all sold like shit. The games were truly horrible. People need to realize that if a drastic change isn’t made to the new Tomb Raider than the whole series is going to be gone forever. Because gamers hate those three games. I like excessive violence personally. i mean look at some of the crappy violence in games like GTA IV. you shoot a guy and he doesn’t bleed out or have blood seep out the wound like IN REALITY. Violence is already underdone in a lot of games. and it sucks. Taking violence out of games will never happen, as well as that is the stupidest thing anyone could do as it will completely RUIN the gaming industry. And quite frankly, you aren’t helping.
I never actually said I had a problem with the implied violence in the forthcoming Tomb Raider reboot. In fact, I’d argue that it looks like the developer is approaching it in a mature, gritty way, which is probably a good thing.
This isn’t about attacking violence in games generally. As I say in the article, some of my favourite games are actually pretty damn violent.
What I’m suggesting is that there is an increasing tendency for more realistic, explicit, gratuitous violence in mainstream games, and it is the way in which some of these titles present it that I find slightly unpalatable.
First of all, games are interactive art. The developers can make them however they want based on what they want to convey. It’s up to the players to decide if it’s their cup of tea. Don’t like it? Don’t buy it. If most of the targeted audience didn’t like it, the game would fail and related ideas will be phased out. Stop trying to tell what is valid or invalid to others. People don’t make a big deal about all those nude renaissance art do they?
Next, women are sexualized most for their beauty while men are sexualized most for their behaviour. It’s genetic and is what attracts the opposite sex. Hence why most men in video games aren’t skinny, feminine, under-confindent, indecisive etc. But I don’t see many rants about this for some reason. I can say with with relative certainty that a game with weak mean and ugly women would not sell well. Look at the undercurrents of the media around you. How many female actors are ugly and how many male actors are weak? However “mature’ people think they are, they are still constrained by the same old same old. And wtf is “maturity” anyway. Every person who considers themselves “mature” is living inside a box.
As to violence, I will say that people will want what they can’t have. In this case, they are curious about violence and are experiencing it in the closest non-real way possible. Again, movies with rape scenes aren’t that big of a deal, they’re “art”. The way I see it, as long as it isn’t hurting someone else, people can do and enjoy whatever the hell they want.
Breezed through the article since I’ve read loads of rants on hypersexualization and violence.
I actually agree wholeheartedly with your first point. Developers can make whatever they like, and people can buy it if they so choose. That’s not in dispute.
What I’m trying to argue with regards to violence in gaming is that I can understand where people like Warren Spector are coming from. In my view, cartoonish, stylized OTT violence should be taken with a pinch of salt, and if more realistic, unpleasent and gratuitous violence is handled in a serious manner, then again: no problem.
The thing that I do find myself noting is that more and more games seem to be treating the second type of violent content either as fun-fuelled, knock-about entertainment, or in a sort of matter-of-fact, trivial, throwaway manner. I don’t believe it’s going to corrupt us all. I’m not about to pick up a placard and start protesting. Like you say, developers can make it if they want, and people can buy it if they want. But I do think it’s slightly tasteless, and it smacks to me of gaming thinking that being ‘adult’ means simply filling the screen with explicit, graphic images.
With regards to gender, you’re right that men too are often stereotyped in games (butch, confident etc.). But there are an awful lot more examples of complex, intelligent and deep male characters in games than there are women characters. And while you’re right to say that the film industry also perpetuates stereotypes of cocky tough men and sexy, shallow women, the difference is that there are plenty of higher-brow movies, TV etc which DO provide complex female characters with depth. There are very few games that do the same.
“As long as it isn’t hurting someone else, people can do and enjoy whatever the hell they want.”
Again, I agree. Not trying to dictate or preach. I just wanted to point out that, as gamers, our natural inclination when faced with criticism of our hobby is to be on the ultra-defencise – yet there are, in my opinion, some issues with violent content and sexism that we should at least be willing to debate. Just as you and I are doing now.
After re-reading my post, I realized I came off a bit harsh and arrogant. This was not my intention. I had just come off reading a bunch of rants about hypersexuality and extreme violence being a new big bad thing.
There is a reason Micheal Bay explosions and great CGI do so well in movies despite their lack of depth. Like in movies, violence in games sells. And what sells, survives. I feel that the current fascination with violence in games is part of games evolving as an art-medium. They are exploring different areas of humanity but at the same time surviving. If the audience is preferential to violence during their purchase, would it be financially beneficial to not use it? Interestingly, I’ve played plenty of games recently that have explored more in-depth topics.
And what is “adult” or “mature” really? As I said before, creating a status of “mature” or “adult” is closed minded. Something could be distasteful to me or you but who are we to judge something worthy or unworthy?
I think much of the stereotypes of characters in video games has a lot do with the present audience. Currently, males (could also be certain age group, behavior type, race etc.) are still the majority in the medium of video games and the games will cater to them since they have to sell. As females grow larger in audience, more games will become genderless (ageless, race-less, etc) as has happened in movies. Keep in mind that this doesn’t mean gender-biased, age-biased, whatever-biased games will not disappear.
Thanks for your response Kal. All great points. I also think you’re right when you say that what is ‘adult’ or ‘mature’ is ultimately subjective – and I have to concede that what I might find distasteful or ‘juvenile’, might not be seen as such by others.
I think your point about games exploring violence as a theme as the medium evolves is really interesting too. My take would be that developers are attempting to address more serious content/ideas which is ultimately a great thing, but perhaps, as you say, violence sells – so this is what ends up becoming the main focus.
And yes, as the primary target for games is generally young or young-ish guys, I accept that mainstream companies will tailor their content accordingly. Hopefully, as you say, there will be a broadening out of characters, stories, content and themes as more women get involved etc.
There’s a hidden agenda behind the desensitization of humanity through video games and television PROGRAMMING. The masses are being programmed to accept and embrace violence/overt sexuality by those in control of our media. I suggest you do some research on your government and the men who own the major corporations which supply you with this brainwashing garbage.
Er, thanks for that. I’ll bear it in mind…
I hope so, further research into this topic may save your life someday. Godbless