halo 2 multipleriam2greenHave you played Unreal Tournament? Even Timesplitters 2 makes Halo 2 seem like you're moving through molasses.
ymi_basic's forum posts
On one hand, you say that adults shouldn't be deprived of anything, hence implying that you don't want censorship of any kind. On the other, you make comments suggesting that these products shouldn't really be out in the open, though, due to the risk of minors being able to get their hands on it, which to a degree implies that you /do/ want to do something about these products (in terms of their existance) to keep minors safe. Which brings us to the main issue: You can't have both. Skylock00I believe that I already addressed my views on this to you ...
[QUOTE="Skylock00"] So...especially in Rockstar's part, if we were to go with your stance, what is the solution?ymi_basicWell I'm against censorship, so if there was a solution, I would prefer a voluntary one. It would be nice (imo) if companies like Rockstar (Take-Two actually)were to voluntarily choose to make games without always pushing the envelope of acceptability for violence. On the demand side, it would be nice (imo) if there was not a large enough "ligitimate" audience of "adults" who have a need to simulate the removal of another man's testicles. However, being a realist and having seen that there's no way to stop supply if there is demand (ex: drugs), I realize that there is no solution.
As for your last paragraph, we're not talking about children. This game is not intended for them. We're talking about adult gamers who will be deprived of the experience they were looking for as well as developers who are not allowed to fully realize their vision.UpInFlamesI don't want to deprive adults of anything and that is why I don't support censorship of any kind. Heck, I don't think substances should be banned. If your an adult, I don't think I should have any say in your choice to smoke a spliff or drop acid. I'm a libertarian.
However, consumers of violent games or drugs in a free society should still recognize that their demand for these products will create a supply... and because the supply exists, unfortunately it will ALWAYS be possible for these things to get in the hands of children.
Now I agree that I'm not being particularly fair to violence in media because I'm making a parallel to something (drugs) that has potentially far morewidespread consequences. However, imo the analogy is still valid.
[QUOTE="ymi_basic"]Well I'm against censorship, so if there was a solution, I would prefer a voluntary one. It would be nice (imo) if companies like Rockstar (Take-Two actually)were to voluntarily choose to make games without always pushing the envelope of acceptability for violence. On the demand side, it would be nice (imo) if there was not a large enough "ligitimate" audience of "adults" who have a need to simulate the removal of another man's testicles. However, being a realist and having seen that there's no way to stop supply if there is demand (ex: drugs), I realize that there is no solution.Having said that though, there's nothing that requires me to respect thosewho crave drugs or ultraviolence in their entertainment nor those who supply it. Even though I'm a firm supporter of freedom of speech andexpression, I don't respect thosewho hold up those principles to defend crap that I believe is of very little artistic value and could very well "inadvertently" be harming young people. Personally, I have more respect for those who defend the right to display sex and nudity in entertainment because I believe those things are natural, healthy, and I see no reason to hide them.UpInFlames
You should stop these comparisons to tobacco and drugs. They don't make any sense as to what we're talking about here, and you're only indirectly insulting people. From what you've been saying here, I have a hard time believing that you're truly a "firm supporter of freedom of speech and artistic expression". From the looks of things, you only support those ideals when the content is suited to your tastes.
Well, if I have to fight for our right to see extreme violence (even though it doesn't interest me in the least and that I think that it could in fact be harmful to children) in order to be a firm supporter of freedom of speech, then I suppose you're right. I'm not.However even thoughI don't rally to that cause, I do oppose censorship of violence. I simply choose my battles for things that personally interest me.
As for the analogy to tobacco and drugs, you may not think it's valid but I do. I do see violence in entertainment as potentially damaging to young minds. If nothing else, I know for a fact that my little girl has had nightmares because she once saw a bit of the movie "American Werewolf in London" ... and that movie is incredibly mild compared to the things we are discussing.
So...especially in Rockstar's part, if we were to go with your stance, what is the solution?Skylock00Well I'm against censorship, so if there was a solution, I would prefer a voluntary one. It would be nice (imo) if companies like Rockstar (Take-Two actually)were to voluntarily choose to make games without always pushing the envelope of acceptability for violence. On the demand side, it would be nice (imo) if there was not a large enough "ligitimate" audience of "adults" who have a need to simulate the removal of another man's testicles. However, being a realist and having seen that there's no way to stop supply if there is demand (ex: drugs), I realize that there is no solution.
Having said that though, there's nothing that requires me to respect thosewho crave drugs or ultraviolence in their entertainment nor those who supply it. Even though I'm a firm supporter of freedom of speech andexpression, I don't respect thosewho hold up those principles to defend crap that I believe is of very little artistic value and could very well "inadvertently" be harming young people. Personally, I have more respect for those who defend the right to display sex and nudity in entertainment because I believe those things are natural, healthy, and I see no reason to hide them.
[QUOTE="ymi_basic"]People who want to fight strongly in defence of Rockstar and this game have to understand that the public will perceive their stance as a demonstration that violence is of utmost importance to gamers.UpInFlamesBeing misunderstood is common. Someone who doesn't agree with you will try to twist what you're saying and make it a matter of something else (as evidenced in this very thread), but that doesn't mean we should all shut up because of it. Just the contrary.Are you really being misunderstood though? Are you really fighting for the principles of freedom of speech and artistic expression, or do you just want more games with ever higher levels of graphic violence?
I don't know about you personally, but I remember when the news first hit that boobs might jiggle inDOA Beach Volleyball, the majority ofthe reaction on these boards was along the lines of "that won't add anything to the gameplay, but it will just make us gamers look like a bunch of oggling pervs." I don't remember many crusaders of freedom of speech and artistic expression showing up to fight that battle.
Now I don't know much about Manhunt 2, and although I would expect that there's nothing in it in which I would find it reasonble to apply what is essentially (or literally, in Europe) a ban on the game, I take issue with many simply claiming "Free speech" as the end-all argument and if you don't agree then you hate freedom. "Freedom of speech" as with all rights, still should apply to reasonable limits. At least, that's how it is in Canada because of the "Reasonable limits clause" with which I very much agree. For example, would you feel someone should have the freedom to release a KKK game? What about a game called "The Holocaust Never Happened" or "Bomb Building for Dummies". Of course those are extremes, but I want to emphasize that there is a limit that I believe most would agree should not be crossed.yodariquoI believe it's a bad precedent to allow censorship of this kind, but I agree with you that there will always be a line of acceptability and it seems to me that Rockstar will always want to slip one foot over that line. People who want to fight strongly in defence of Rockstar and this game have to understand that the public will perceive their stance as a demonstration that violence is of utmost importance to gamers. Unless that's true, I'd advise the defenders to pick their fights more wisely.
note: I see Rockstar's parent company (Take-Two) is sticking to its tendency to the moral low ground ... http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/newsanalysis/techgames/10379273.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA
[QUOTE="ymi_basic"][QUOTE="Skylock00"][QUOTE="Solid_Snake_7"] If it were that simple. But do you think for one minute that Rockstar makes these games with adults being the target audience? No they don't.Skylock00Um...yes they do. That's kind of what they've been doing with various games. The target audience is adults over the the age of 18, not teens. Furthermore, stores are cracking down more on selling M rated games to minors, but even then...that isn't Rockstar's concern at all if they want to make a game /for/ adults.
Right. And the cigarette industry doesn't want minors to smoke.How is that related at all to what I'm saying? The stance I have is that the target audience of some of Rockstar's games, like GTA and Manhunt, is adults. If you can show me one shread of evidence that proves that their target audience for those games are minors, then you can have a case, but this counter doesn't do anything at all.
Hey, I don't support censorship nor prohibition. However, I'm not going to shed one tear for Rockstar any more than I would for Phillip Morris. Rockstar makes their money by pushing the envelope of acceptability. If this stuff wasn't challenged, they'd just take it further. Why? Because controversy is great publicity and kids are suckers for it. Kids don't smoke because they want to smoke. They smoke because they're not supposed to smoke.
Where is the outcry of support for nudity in games? Why do people care more about full on graphic gore in Manhunt than full on nudity in DOA? Personally, I'd rather hear kids talk about Kasumi's shave job than how cool it is that you can rip a guy's nuts off with pliers.
Log in to comment