I understand, what I don't is how suddenly shooting civilians and killing innocent people in games is now something everybody unites against. You've done so and been rewarded for it a billion times over.
In most video games I think people want innocent civilians in the world to create a sense of it actually being a real world. I don't think "most" consumers play the game solely to wander around the world and kill innocent civilians though. Or at least I don't.
Just like anything I think there are exceptions to this. How somebody might just goof around in GTA killing people and seeing how long he can survive until getting killed which ostensibly is what this Hatred game is going for.
Now a person might make all sorts of stories in his head about why he is doing this. Who is to really know. But we can probably agree that for some people the justification, that I hate all human beings and want to see them brutally murdered might be a turn off for some people. Taking it one step further what if the devs have inserted an agenda in the game where as the people I'm killing also might be of a different race than me. Once again not saying Hatred is doing this just yet, but you could understand how they might be even more of a turn off for some people.
And some people might not care either way. They would just say its digital data that doesn't represent real people and reject the notion that they could be influenced by the agenda of the game or indirectly supporting the views of the dev team.
I logically see how all these positions can exist. And there is a fair and intelligent conversation to have on it. It's just unlikely that conversation will happen on the internet. And even if the conversation does happen, you can't divorce it from the reality of how people view these things and the inherent reactions, it provokes in people.
I think the discussion and the debate are fine. As long as they aren't stopped from being able to create or express themselves in this way all the other stuff is valid.
