Extra Lives: Censorship not the answer to “Hatred”


Nick Booth, JagWire copy editor

The media can’t seem to stop talking about the recently announced game “Hatred.” It’s disgusting. It’s violent. It promotes a blatant disregard for human life.

The game, which generated controversy as soon as it was announced on Thursday, Oct. 16, focuses on an insane protagonist who makes it his mission to try to kill every man, woman and child he can get his hands on. It’s a brutally violent isometric shooter that includes gruesome finishing moves on innocent civilians.

“Hatred” doesn’t innovate. It doesn’t really change anything. Isometric shooters are nothing new and neither are violent video game deaths. “Hatred” hasn’t done anything except create shock value in an attempt to generate more sales. It’s vile, disgusting and pointless.

That’s okay. It’s okay that the game pushes the limit of what society deems acceptable just for the sake of it. “Hatred” is in poor taste, but it should still be allowed to exist. Censoring the content of the game doesn’t solve anything. No good can come of simply removing content from a game because it is deemed offensive by society. Although the game’s content is horrifying, it’s still a form of speech.

That concept is what’s so important to this discussion. The actions depicted in the game are violent and never acceptable in a moral society, but the depiction itself is still free speech. The fact of the matter is that this game doesn’t do any harm. It’s not slander or libel. It has no actual consequences in the real world. Thus, while I don’t like the game and probably won’t play it, I won’t advocate for its censorship. Nobody should.

(Visited 8 times, 1 visits today)