There are two main reasons we should expect to see blood in Red Steel 2:
- The game's very title strongly implies the presence of blood on a sword. The first game's box art actually shows a bloody sword.
- The series involves using a sword to hurt people, and this aspect of gameplay is apparently being showcased much more in the sequel, thanks to Wii MotionPlus.
Now to be clear, I'm not saying that Red Steel 2 should be super bloody and full of over-the-top gore, like MadWorld. There's a huge spectrum of how violence can be portrayed in a video game. But the presence of blood in a sword-based game is not a minor detail, something easily ignored. It's no more a technicality than gravity. When you use a sword on someone, he bleeds. That is, in fact, the primary result -- severe injury or death may occur down the line, but that's no guarantee.
Removing blood from a sword-based game leads to certain consequences. The action is less satisfying because the player doesn't get the logical result. It's more difficult to gauge how effective you have been in combat, so artificial indicators have to be added. And on a more philosophical level, you are misrepresenting violence by removing the natural consequences.
So why would a developer raise these issues by removing bloodshed from a game that clearly begs for it? Ubisoft claims creative reasons, in the June issue of Nintendo Power magazine:
"The gore just doesn't fit for us and what we're trying to do
"
First, blood and gore are not the same thing. Second, let's just be honest: they are going for a Teen rating because it allows them to market the game to a wider audience. But that shouldn't stop them from showing a reasonable amount of blood that is appropriate for the kind of action in the game. It is possible, under the convoluted ESRB system, to have blood (without gore) and still get a T-rating, as is the case with The Conduit, Batman: Arkham Asylum, and X-Men Origins: Wolverine (Wii/PS2/PSP versions). Obviously, severing limbs or releasing internal organs would go into the "gore" category and would automatically push the game into the M-rating, but there is room for compromise here. Yet indications from the first game and what little we know of Red Steel 2 are that blood will be avoided altogether.
I'm not saying that blood is always good or that every game should have it, but this game is going to look downright weird without some visual feedback for the swordplay that is, supposedly, "as real as you'd always dreamed!"
Blood being an obvious factor doesn't stop all of those gore-less World War II games from being popped out.
Blood being an obvious factor doesn't stop all of those gore-less World War II games from being popped out.
I intentionally avoided that hornet's nest (this time), but yes, neutered WW2 games are an evil pox upon gaming.
Maybe take a page from 1993 and put a blood code in?
Samurai Shodown anthology got a Teen rating for its use of 'animated' blood. I'm guessing since Red Steel 2 is going for some sort of realism, a realistic depiction of blood is an automatic M rating? And the difference between the two types of blood is...?
Maybe take a page from 1993 and put a blood code in?
Samurai Shodown anthology got a Teen rating for its use of 'animated' blood. I'm guessing since Red Steel 2 is going for some sort of realism, a realistic depiction of blood is an automatic M rating? And the difference between the two types of blood is...?
It supposed to be cel-shaded isn't it? So it couldn't be that realistic in a sense.
Do Zelda games need blood? No. If there was, either I didn't notice it, or I just didn't care.
Madworld has blood because that is what the game is all about, pure, senseless violence.
If the developers of RS2 think that blood does not have to be a predominant feature for the kind of game they are trying to make and sell to us, than no blood is needed.
Let's step back here for a moment: Zelda is a fantasy series... So yeah, blood isn't really necessary there.
Maybe take a page from 1993 and put a blood code in?
Samurai Shodown anthology got a Teen rating for its use of 'animated' blood. I'm guessing since Red Steel 2 is going for some sort of realism, a realistic depiction of blood is an automatic M rating? And the difference between the two types of blood is...?
It supposed to be cel-shaded isn't it? So it couldn't be that realistic in a sense.
Tell that to Madworld. It's not like Cel Shading can't do something as simple as a blood particle effect. Gore is a trickier issue because it deals with internal geometry, but blood is fairly simple. Ubisoftz could do it if they wanted to, but as usual Ubisoftz just doesn't get it when it comes to doing games on Wii.
Maybe take a page from 1993 and put a blood code in?
This is pretty dumb here. When James Bond shoots people, is there blood?
you know i remember the mortal combat days with the snes and the genesis. [..] i dont care about blood i care about a good story and game play and non crappy graphics.
you know i remember the mortal combat days with the snes and the genesis. [..] i dont care about blood i care about a good story and game play and non crappy graphics.
I have a feeling you were looking at the wrong game series then.
I think the more realistic graphics become, the less it looks like "style"; a common excuse used for violent games.
Red Steel shouldn't have to alienate it's audience for the sake of continuity. It's bad business. In all honesty, the only time you ever need blood is when decapitation is involved, but that already crosses the boundary.
I understand the argument but I don't think Red Steel 2 is a good example case. Red Steel was junk. Red Steel 2 will likely be junk. The reason they aren't having blood in is to ensure a 'T' rating because they feel that will attract a wider audience. In a different scenario I might see that as compromising the game. But this game has no real artistic integrity to compromise. Red Steel 1 was just product put out around the Wii launch to get sales from early adopters. It was not a good game but considering Ubisoft's reputation, particularly with the Wii, it was likely never meant to be. It just had to be good enough to release as a product and look interesting enough in screenshots to "con" you into buying it. And Red Steel 2 will be the same thing.
To me this is like criticizing Miley Cyrus' latest album for not having a raw enough guitar sound.
Red Steak 2 actually looks unrealistic enough to do without blood. Flashy sword streaks may be sufficient.
Which means "Red Steel" is the worst franchise title they could've picked.
Bioshock is the spiritual sequel to Biohazard. bad names are an industry staple.
Red Steak 2 actually looks unrealistic enough to do without blood. Flashy sword streaks may be sufficient.
Which means "Red Steel" is the worst franchise title they could've picked.
So you actually prefer your Red Steak well done?
You listened to that album?
To me this is like criticizing Miley Cyrus' latest album for not having a raw enough guitar sound.
You listened to that album?
That'll just get them fined and the game pulled off the shelves.
Smash Brothers doesn't have blood and IGN's 'Trick' trailer shows how ridiculous blood would be in some games.
"as real as you'd always dreamed!"
I'm pretty sure Perfect Dark let you turn blood on or off with a menu option.It didn't let you turn it "off" per se, but if you used the "Paintball" option, the blood would be multi-coloured.
Bioshock is the spiritual sequel to Biohazard. bad names are an industry staple.
What I was talking about was the old MK1 Genesis vs SNES version. The Genesis version didn't have blood in it by default, but you can input a code to enable it. Don't remember that one being told to be toned down or face de-shelving...
Quote.
What I was talking about was the old MK1 Genesis vs SNES version. The Genesis version didn't have blood in it by default, but you can input a code to enable it. Don't remember that one being told to be toned down or face de-shelving...Quote.Quote
And the difference between the two types of blood is...?
Apparently not, because if there won't be blood, there won't be fun.
the blog has spoken
I didn't mean to imply that that is what you were saying.Apparently not, because if there won't be blood, there won't be fun.
the blog has spoken
I don't remember writing anything to that effect.
The RS2 thread has a link to a new trailer for the game showcasing the new style. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGhnEafXKfc)
After seeing that, I'm understanding where your coming from Jonny. Having at least some sort of visual feedback like blood could benefit the game. Didn't No More Heroes have just money come out of enemies in the PAL version? Even seeing pieces of armor and clothes come of frequently in place of blood could enhance it.
Though I'll reserve a final judgment concerning the impact of sans-blood in the game until I see more video and actually play the game.
Didn't No More Heroes have just money come out of enemies in the PAL version?
::Puts stratos back on hit list::
this is awful news!!!!!!!
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3230/3284840087_639e363bd4.jpg?v=0)