WBGhiro: I'd understand your point if you disliked violent videogames in general, but I don't get is how you can enjoy Bloodbowl, and frown upon GTAIV's violence at the same time, I mean the concept is practically the same, except one focuses on fantasy football and the other about criminals.
I'm not against depicting violence in games. I firmly believe that games _should_ be free to address everything, including difficult topics like violence. I do, however, tend to dislike games that glorify or celebrate violence, especially if they use a realistic setting, disregard the perspective of the victims, suggest that massively violent behavior can be kept without negative consequences, reward such behavior through statistics and achievements, and offer no alternatives. Whether intended or not, GTA 4 is making a statement about violence in our world, and it's a statement that I regard as unethical, wrong, and at the very least, problematic.
Blood Bowl, on the other hand, is a) a tactical sports game, and b) an over-the-top parody on sports as well as fantasy clichés. The depicted violence adds to the mad hilarity of a setting that is so far removed from the real world that it can't possibly be taken seriously (imho).
Psyringe: GTA 4 is not a satire.
WBGhiro: But it is, it depicts the life of the average criminal in a completely exaggerated way gloryifing it at the beginning, and taking the piss out of it as the story unfolds, that's the basic plot of every GTA game.
We may have different beliefs on what constitutes a satire then. I simply cannot see satirical aspects in GTA 4 as far as I played it. We may have to agree to disagree on that one.
That was pretty funny. ;)