Just this morning PC World confirmed that a new Mortal Kombat game slated for this fall will combine its classic characters with another set of classic characters– from the DC Universe. As bizarre as it sounds, it’s no joke. Batman and Superman are both definitely in but no word yet on who else might be added.

This isn’t horribly surprising to me– it’s another of a long line of crossover fighting games, like Marvel Vs. Capcom and X-Men Vs. Street Fighter. The real difference, and I think the thing that will give this game a lot of hype, is that it’s Mortal Kombat, a game known for it’s excessive violence. It seems like a weird move on DC’s part to allow their characters to be featured in a such a dark arena… until, of course, you read any of DC’s most recent books. Comics aren’t necessarily for kids anymore and after reading recent issues of Batman: Confidential and the trade of Infinite Crisis, this almost looks like a logical step for DC. A lot of readers who like dark comics (myself included) probably also like dark video games.

What’s going to hurt this game, though, is that the trademark fatalities are gone. In fact, it’s probably less violent all around since it won’t be including the M for Mature label. It seems that while the comic world has gotten dark enough to envision a MK/DC game, the DC characters are too iconic and well-known for the producers to allow it to get that violent. A part of me really appreciates this, especially since I consider Batman and Superman among the most legendary characters that our 20th and 21st century mythologies have to offer. And at the same time… if you’re going to do something, you really should do it. Maybe the problem is the title: Mortal Kombat Vs. the DC Universe. If it were a game that had the MK characters mixed with DC, maybe even mixed with some other fighting game characters (I’m probably the only one but Batman Vs. Virtua Fighter sounds REALLY appealing to me) and just called it something else, you could probably get away with it. But a lot of die-hard MK fans are going to have a hard time wrapping their heads around a less-violent game, just for the sake of DC characters.

Looking at the trailer, it certainly looks pretty violent to me… but for some reason the lack of blood is a going to be a problem for a lot of fans.

It’ll be available in the fall for the XBox 360 and PS3.

LLAP

-Cap’n Logan

I picked up a copy of Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles the other day and as I shot and blasted my way through endless hordes of zombies and monsters I realized something. Since when did video games become so violent? Now don’t get me wrong, I love seeing the blood of an enemy splatter on the camera from a mortal sniper shot to the head just as much as the next guy. But when did actions like these become a norm in the video game industry. Could it be because graphics have improved so much over the last 20 years, or is it just a reflection of the increasing violence in today’s society? More importantly though is whether or not video game developers are relying to heavily on violence to carry their games and not enough on the basics of fun.

I remember a time when video games, plain and simple, were just about fun. Clever level design and an appealing hero and cast of villains were all that were needed to make an entertaining and fun game. Just look back to the NES, Super NES and SEGA eras and their onslaught of fun and challenging games. Games like Super Mario Bros., Castlevania, The Legend of Zelda, Sonic the Hedgehog and many others were all created with these essential elements in place. They all featured appealing and relatable heroes in Mario, Link, Belmont and Sonic, along with unique villains and great level development. The storylines were original and unique and although they lacked depth, they made up for it in seamless game play. All of these games and others consisted of killing enemies, yet when each enemy was defeated they wouldn’t gush or spew forth blood; rather they would simply vanish, usually into smoke or flames. Again I’m not advocating a ban on violence in video games. I actually like the added sense of realism in the games that I play and I don’t think that playing violent video games leads to added aggressiveness. Rather, I am simply saying that video games today rely to heavily on violence, obscenities, and bloodshed and lack the plot depth, character development and design like their predecessors.

Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past – Heroic protagonist and excellent storyline

Sonic 2 – Great level design and overall fun factor

Games like Grand Theft Auto and Manhunt, which do present a shallow fun factor, are perfect examples of games that rely to heavily on gore. I like the fact that you can do anything and go anywhere in the Grand Theft Auto games, yet this is only appealing for a short period of time and as a result it lacks replay value and depth. Stealing an innocent bystanders car and then running them over with their own ride can only be thoroughly enjoyed so many times until it just gets stale. I do like violence in the games I play, as long as it is incorporated efficiently and effectively. Take for example God of War and Resident Evil 4. These two games battled it out for game of the year in 2005. Why? Because they were both solid games that featured awesome heroes, villains, plots and level designs topped off with an effective use of violence. God of War was an original masterpiece with flawless control and overwhelming enemies, and Resident Evil 4 managed to take the series into an innovated direction with pinpoint shooting accuracy and a spectacular storyline.

Grand Theft Auto 3 – Killing and stealing is fun….for awhile.

Resident Evil 4 – Mixing great game play and plot with violence equals one deadly combination

This increase of violence in video games also leads me to my next point. Many people that play video games today label games that don’t feature added violence (blood and obscenities) as “kiddy.” I used to hear that word tossed around like crazy by my friends when I would talk about my Gamecube games. They used to come over and enjoy playing games like Super Mario Sunshine and Super Smash Bros. Melee, but they would always say that it was too kiddy. I would ask them why these games were kiddy, and they would usually respond by saying the games looked too cartoony or not real life-like. I used to get so mad because kiddy should be a word used to describe the difficulty of a game not simply the visuals and graphics, and anyone who has played Sunshine or Melee knows that those games are no piece of cake. My friends and I used to have long arguments about which games were best and what systems were superb. I used to tell them that they only liked certain games because they included ridiculous and over-the-top violence. At the end of the day it isn’t the violence that makes a solid video game. Just because it looks real doesn’t mean that it’s a good game. In order to have a solid video game that is noteworthy one must repeat the formulas of the past. Clever level design, an appealing hero and villain cast and the underlying fun factor are all necessary ingredients to make a good game. Once you have all those elements in the mix then you can add some violence to top it all off.

-Dillon (D-dub)