I own a few chickens for the sake of eggs, named them as well, and while I’d happily eat chicken and rice or any other derivative of eating chicken I wouldn’t just go out back and carve up one of our hens. I definitely think it’s because of the ascribed personality to the animal/creature. Pokemon are well established to be able to think independently, have their own personalities, and many are quite weak in the wild to the point of having near useless attacks. Introducing the ability to have those creatures die isn’t bad on its own, there can be gameplay merit to that, but the line for me is when you make a visualization of it. When you take that feature and expand on it and advertise with it.
Sure, your pet will die someday, probably peacefully in its sleep but something like Palword says “What is we make it violent?” It’s as visceral to me as someone saying to you that your pet chicken would make some really good nuggets and proceeding to butcher them in front of you, acting disconnected afterwords and saying something to the effect of “What? It’s just a chicken.”
I guess my brain works differently, I couldn’t just ignore the fact that the animal I’m eating did have the personality of a real living cow or chicken, cows sing and play, they’re curious and friendly and make friends - chickens mostly just recognise me as someone who carries food to them but they have personalities and emotions when you get to know them. I know that about them so if I was going to eat one of them I’d think about that and think about the brutality of their life and death.
Code is just code. It is (so far) just a series of logic choices that determine which pixel to light up or how fast to vibrate the speaker - it might look like personality but when you kill it there is no fear in it or pain, it doesn’t feel anything when you kill it’s children or it’s friends. I guess I just see numbers when I look at a video game, when I look at a chicken nugget I see real suffering and real death
I own a few chickens for the sake of eggs, named them as well, and while I’d happily eat chicken and rice or any other derivative of eating chicken I wouldn’t just go out back and carve up one of our hens. I definitely think it’s because of the ascribed personality to the animal/creature. Pokemon are well established to be able to think independently, have their own personalities, and many are quite weak in the wild to the point of having near useless attacks. Introducing the ability to have those creatures die isn’t bad on its own, there can be gameplay merit to that, but the line for me is when you make a visualization of it. When you take that feature and expand on it and advertise with it.
Sure, your pet will die someday, probably peacefully in its sleep but something like Palword says “What is we make it violent?” It’s as visceral to me as someone saying to you that your pet chicken would make some really good nuggets and proceeding to butcher them in front of you, acting disconnected afterwords and saying something to the effect of “What? It’s just a chicken.”
I guess my brain works differently, I couldn’t just ignore the fact that the animal I’m eating did have the personality of a real living cow or chicken, cows sing and play, they’re curious and friendly and make friends - chickens mostly just recognise me as someone who carries food to them but they have personalities and emotions when you get to know them. I know that about them so if I was going to eat one of them I’d think about that and think about the brutality of their life and death.
Code is just code. It is (so far) just a series of logic choices that determine which pixel to light up or how fast to vibrate the speaker - it might look like personality but when you kill it there is no fear in it or pain, it doesn’t feel anything when you kill it’s children or it’s friends. I guess I just see numbers when I look at a video game, when I look at a chicken nugget I see real suffering and real death