Slashdot Mirror
Postal 2 Not Violent Enough?
An anonymous reader writes "An article from Joystick101.org is claiming Postal 2 is not violent enough to be called a success. Everyone knows that the game failed to live up to expectations, but could more violence have made things better?" I just found Postal 2 to have load times far far longer than any other game I'd played of late, and my own impatience forced me to quit early.
It is ridiculous that violence is even sugested as the reason for failure. Games that have good gameplay, regardless of the violence sell best. Games with good storylines, then games with good graphics follow. The violence isnt even a selling factor, I can name many games that hae flopped due to violence, because they had nothing else.
I read this article yesturday. Basically, the reason they said it wasn't violent enough is because there is little or no shock value so the game has no total value.
People have beening torturing and killing hookers in GTA3 and VC for awhile now so there is no spectacle with Postal 2.
The author suggests that since the developers (Running with Scissors) were going for ultra-violence then they should have made it over the top instead of just a little more violent then the rest.
The game is mediocre at best anyway. They are just trying to capitalize on the spectacle of violence.
-RPG
I just found Postal 2 to have load times far far longer than any other game I'd played of late, and my own impatience forced me to quit early.
You had to buy it to find out there were bad load times. The publisher doesn't care if you ever play the game, only that they get your money. As far as they're concerned you've cast your vote in the "loved it" column.
Since there are no stores left that take returns on software, I'm surprised they even bother trying to make good games anymore. All they really need to do is make a really cool box and buy some reviewers and go back to using the (now free) original quake engine.
Actually quite a few stores - like GAME - take games back for a full refund (e.g. GAME take any game back within 10 days for *any* reason).
Depending on the game, they may be required to give you a refund under existing consumer protection laws - I took 'Need For Speed' for the Game Cube back because it was unfit for the purpose for which it was sold, namely the frame rate was so low it was utterly unplayable. I explained this to the store where I bought it and they said, yeah, okay, and I got my refund.
This is true of any game with glaring gameplay flaws or that performs poorly on a system which is recommened on the box.
If it's really not fit for purpose, take it back (within a reasonable, timely period, like 48 hours) state your reason and demand a refund.
and lots of it, but the thing is that ppl (gamers at the very least) dont stayed awed by ANYTHING for very long, certainly not some cheesy violence. When I bought SoF2, and started chopping open someone's head, I felt vaguely nauseous. 30min later I was dismembering without any compunction at all. The same goes for Postal2, it has heaps of (novel) violence on Mon and Tue, but by then you'll have tapped *everything* and it gets boring. Any game which relies upon 1 aspect such as mediocre as violence and gore will not be well received since gamers are primarily after a cerebral experience. We want be constantly thinking, even if its as simple a thought as "How do I kill all of these guys in the next room?". Take Tetris, Minesweeper, "that Snake game", Chess, Go etc... all rely on 1 idea and all are still fun for a quick play. It's because your brain and not your reflexes are doing the work (although speed does come into it, but that means you have to think fast). So no amount of violence could have made Postal2 fun. My most fun moment was when I poured petrol around a group of protestors and in a diagonal line through the middle, ensuring their destruction. I liked it not because they burnt etc, i liked it because I had checkmated all of them at once.