Please understand that not all games that are "violent" talk about the same kind of violence. There is monster-of-the-week, there is strike-through-heaven-and-dethrone, and there is a kill-them-through-the-force-of-your-goodness, among many others. All different.

And not one is better than the other. Also, Violence does not necessarily = bad. There is Violence used by the marginalized and disenfranchised, by the colonized, to take back what is theirs. The sword changes when wielded by a new hand.

In the same way, I don't enjoy talk of comparing games that have "violence mechanics" versus games that do not. games that are inherently non violent are no better than games that inherently are. They just *are.* Instead, think of them as different genres.

Also, please consider the designer's context. Like I said earlier: violence, when wielded by the marginalized, oppressed, and disenfranchised is more often than not used to symbolize the push back against the Oppressive Machine that has continued to invade them for generations.

Please consider clarifying what you mean next time when you say "I don't like Violent Games."