Controversial Games

[Zephirius]

so yea blowing up people who murder thousands of jews and bombed pearl harbor is ok because they aren't being mellow peace people either

Lemme guess, it ain't fair however to murder tons of Americans as a Japanese person cause they nuked two of your cities. In war. The same war, in fact, that had the fun Pearl Harbor attack.

And my God, have you ever stopped to think that maybe not the entire population of Germany was behind Hitler and his anti-semitic ways? Given the media coverage of the new movie about it, I'd have assumed more people now know about the 20 July plot [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20_July_plot]. I doubt everyone in Japan was behind the government either. 'Course I'm not sure, don't know much about WW2 Japan, but it seems highly unlikely a hundred million individuals would all agree with their leader.

Ok the nuke strike was after Pearl Harbor, in fact well in to the war. And of coarse not everyone was for Hitler, but if so why should they be offended by a WW2 game? Also some people against Hitler left Germany, some came to America.

Don't see how later into the war matters two shits. And one other thing: The attack on Pearl Harbor was a tactical decision because the American fleet was not prepared for such an assault on their military installation.

The nuclear strikes were performed under the assumption that it was the only way to end the war quickly. They nuked two cities full of civilians. Now which one of these sounds more morally questionable?

 

[dragonburner]

Ask around and many will agree with my stance on WW2 v. 911. It is pretty clear.

I know I said that I said I was done with this thread, but... my god, I utterly speechless about this. You think that an event that resulted in the death of roughly 70 million people [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties] should become more socially accepted in today's media than an event that caused the death of less than 10 000 people, all of the same nationality? Really?

The 10,000 people were civillians on an airplane while (i don't think this is accurate) probably 80 percent up of the people dead from WW2 were soldiers who enlisted in the army. I didn't start the war and I don't agree with war but a terrorist act is worse. IE it's called terrorism.

 

[dragonburner]

911 killed civilians and destroyed families. What if I ripped on your dad getting blown up unprovoked.

And what about all the "Non-American" Families that get blown every time america decides to invade somewhere?

know your facts. Is there a game where you do a blitz on London or something? No! War games are just about war with a little history in between missions. A 911 game would be about blowing up people in a terrorist strike.

 

[dragonburner]

so yea blowing up people who murder thousands of jews and bombed pearl harbor is ok because they aren't being mellow peace people either

Lemme guess, it ain't fair however to murder tons of Americans as a Japanese person cause they nuked two of your cities. In war. The same war, in fact, that had the fun Pearl Harbor attack.

And my God, have you ever stopped to think that maybe not the entire population of Germany was behind Hitler and his anti-semitic ways? Given the media coverage of the new movie about it, I'd have assumed more people now know about the 20 July plot [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20_July_plot]. I doubt everyone in Japan was behind the government either. 'Course I'm not sure, don't know much about WW2 Japan, but it seems highly unlikely a hundred million individuals would all agree with their leader.

Ok the nuke strike was after Pearl Harbor, in fact well in to the war. And of coarse not everyone was for Hitler, but if so why should they be offended by a WW2 game? Also some people against Hitler left Germany, some came to America.

Don't see how later into the war matters two shits. And one other thing: The attack on Pearl Harbor was a tactical decision because the American fleet was not prepared for such an assault on their military installation.

The nuclear strikes were performed under the assumption that it was the only way to end the war quickly. They nuked two cities full of civilians. Now which one of these sounds more morally questionable?

Assuming you know a little at least about Pearl harbor is that it killed civilians as well. Now do I support nuking the two cities. No. But, It was during a time of war while Pearl Harbor started the war. Seriously consequences of attacking the United States should be thought through. Now I know you are going to twist my words, but my point is not that nuke strikes are justified but that a war game is not even the least bit close to controversial compared to a 911 game or a game about a terrorist act. Say what you want but...

 

[jimduckie]

it seems the more controversial a game is the more they sell ,rockstar always pushes the envelop and i like it ,the ones that complain the most never played the game they whine about that is the worst thing to be so hypocritically onesided

 

[stompy]

The 10,000 people were civillians on an airplane while (i don't think this is accurate) probably 80 percent up of the people dead from WW2 were soldiers who enlisted in the army. I didn't start the war and I don't agree with war but a terrorist act is worse. IE it's called terrorism.

I provided a hyper-link, so you have no real excuse to state "80% of the dead in WW2 were soldiers who enlisted". If you're too lazy to have a read, then I'll tell you what the page said:
Civilians killed totalled around 47 million, including 20 million from war-related disease and famine. [Out of a total of 50-70 million, due to the range in sources]

You still think that "80% of those dead in WW2 are enlisted soldiers"?

 

[dragonburner]

The 10,000 people were civillians on an airplane while (i don't think this is accurate) probably 80 percent up of the people dead from WW2 were soldiers who enlisted in the army. I didn't start the war and I don't agree with war but a terrorist act is worse. IE it's called terrorism.

I provided a hyper-link, so you have no real excuse to state "80% of the dead in WW2 were soldiers who enlisted". If you're too lazy to have a read, then I'll tell you what the page said:
Civilians killed totalled around 47 million, including 20 million from war-related disease and famine. [Out of a total of 50-70 million, due to the range in sources]

You still think that "80% of those dead in WW2 are enlisted soldiers"?

Well if you insist on being an ass most of those civilians were ally civilians and 30 something million of the casualties you wrote were soldiers so almost half. War happens. I don't like it. And do those civilians count the holocaust?

 

[oktalist]

I feel that a controversy is a dispute between two or more comparably-vehement, comparably-sized groups.

Abortion is controversial, because pro-lifers and pro-choicers are comparable in their fervour and number. Terrorism is not controversial, because only a tiny handful of nut-jobs think that it is a good thing.

On these grounds, all violent games, Grand Theft Auto, Columbine RPG and perhaps also JFK: Reloaded are controversial. Ethnic Cleansing and its like are not really controversial because they're so unquestionably wrong, morally and artistically bankrupt, and the best thing to do about those is to ignore them.

There is no right not to be offended. Controversy is good; it makes people think. Political correctness is generally a good thing, but is not universally mandatory.

 

[stompy]

Well if you insist on being an ass most of those civilians were ally civilians and 30 something million of the casualties you wrote were soldiers so almost half. War happens. I don't like it. And do those civilians count the holocaust?

I'm the 'ass', huh? I'm not the one who's 'slinging mud', so to speak...

Anyways, back to the argument, I don't understand how you say that "30 something million of the casualties you wrote were soldiers"... the number I wrote was only civilians casualties.

Though, I do take your point that the number might include the Holocaust victims; taking away the 12 million Jews dead because of the Holocaust still leaves 35 million civilians dead.

Again, I take the point that most of the deaths came from the Allies; however, most of the deaths were civilians, and, if you look at the 'deaths as a percentage of total population' table on the Wiki page, you'll see that Nazi Germany lost 10.38% of its population and Japan lost 3.78% of its population. To put that in perspective, the US lost 0.32% of its population, and the U.K. 0.94% of its population.

I still stand by my point: both WW2 and 9/11 should be treated with the same level of respect and maturity when developing media about them. If that means that they become taboo in video games, then you should extend the same treatment for both.

 

[cj_iwakura]

I'd love to see the right wing reaction to being able to side with Lucifer in SMT Nocturne and then go to war on God.

Then again, maybe I should be thankful it's too niche for them to notice.

 

[bad rider]

I think a good line not to cross is to make a game directly based on an actual event where a bunch of people died. Here's what I mean.

.....Crossing the line- a game where the point is to recreate the 911 attacks.

might get offended?

I'm always amazed at the American tendency to view the events of September 11th as something absolutely off-limits to parody or satire.
It wasn't the first act of terrorism in the world, nor will it be the last in the world.... and yet it somehow occupies this island in the American psyche that is untouchable to the media and entertainment industry.

Slaughtering endless hordes of Muslim or Arab extremists or insurgents is fair game, same with Germans and Japanese (as infantry or bomber pilots).... but as soon as the casualties are American some imaginary line gets crossed.

I agree, people could just as well stop making fun of other tragic things if they can't make fun of 911.

Generally you have to wait 23 years till it becomes funny.

 

[bad rider]

911 killed civilians and destroyed families. What if I ripped on your dad getting blown up unprovoked.

And what about all the "Non-American" Families that get blown every time america decides to invade somewhere?

know your facts. Is there a game where you do a blitz on London or something? No! War games are just about war with a little history in between missions. A 911 game would be about blowing up people in a terrorist strike.

*cough*GTA:london *cough*

 

[Cliff_m85]

I think they should make a video game adaptation of "The Aristocrats".

 

[RAKais]

The 10,000 people were civillians on an airplane while (i don't think this is accurate) probably 80 percent up of the people dead from WW2 were soldiers who enlisted in the army. I didn't start the war and I don't agree with war but a terrorist act is worse. IE it's called terrorism.

I provided a hyper-link, so you have no real excuse to state "80% of the dead in WW2 were soldiers who enlisted". If you're too lazy to have a read, then I'll tell you what the page said:
Civilians killed totalled around 47 million, including 20 million from war-related disease and famine. [Out of a total of 50-70 million, due to the range in sources]

You still think that "80% of those dead in WW2 are enlisted soldiers"?

Well if you insist on being an ass most of those civilians were ally civilians and 30 something million of the casualties you wrote were soldiers so almost half. War happens. I don't like it. And do those civilians count the holocaust?

How can YOU be such an ass? Honestly?

As much a tragedy 9/11 was, that does not compare to the millions that were slaughtered during the world wars, enlisted or not, volunteered or not, thats more than the population of the United Kingdom dead in a matter of 6 years during WW2.

 

[dragonburner]

The 10,000 people were civillians on an airplane while (i don't think this is accurate) probably 80 percent up of the people dead from WW2 were soldiers who enlisted in the army. I didn't start the war and I don't agree with war but a terrorist act is worse. IE it's called terrorism.

I provided a hyper-link, so you have no real excuse to state "80% of the dead in WW2 were soldiers who enlisted". If you're too lazy to have a read, then I'll tell you what the page said:
Civilians killed totalled around 47 million, including 20 million from war-related disease and famine. [Out of a total of 50-70 million, due to the range in sources]


You still think that "80% of those dead in WW2 are enlisted soldiers"?

Well if you insist on being an ass most of those civilians were ally civilians and 30 something million of the casualties you wrote were soldiers so almost half. War happens. I don't like it. And do those civilians count the holocaust?

How can YOU be such an ass? Honestly?

As much a tragedy 9/11 was, that does not compare to the millions that were slaughtered during the world wars, enlisted or not, volunteered or not, thats more than the population of the United Kingdom dead in a matter of 6 years during WW2.

you (as you haven't followed the argument) should shut up because don't understand the conversation. Just because you hear F**K You at the end of a conversation doesn't mean that one guy hates the other.

 

[dragonburner]

Well if you insist on being an ass most of those civilians were ally civilians and 30 something million of the casualties you wrote were soldiers so almost half. War happens. I don't like it. And do those civilians count the holocaust?

I'm the 'ass', huh? I'm not the one who's 'slinging mud', so to speak...

Anyways, back to the argument, I don't understand how you say that "30 something million of the casualties you wrote were soldiers"... the number I wrote was only civilians casualties.

Though, I do take your point that the number might include the Holocaust victims; taking away the 12 million Jews dead because of the Holocaust still leaves 35 million civilians dead.

Again, I take the point that most of the deaths came from the Allies; however, most of the deaths were civilians, and, if you look at the 'deaths as a percentage of total population' table on the Wiki page, you'll see that Nazi Germany lost 10.38% of its population and Japan lost 3.78% of its population. To put that in perspective, the US lost 0.32% of its population, and the U.K. 0.94% of its population.

I still stand by my point: both WW2 and 9/11 should be treated with the same level of respect and maturity when developing media about them. If that means that they become taboo in video games, then you should extend the same treatment for both.

I checked your source and belive that the number you wrote was total civilians.
Also the reason that the other countries lost a bigger percent was because they have a smaller total of people. 911 may not have killed many people, but remember the argument. This is not which is worse it is which would be worse as a videogame. A 911 game would just be to offend people. A WW2 game would be to simulate war and is (in the games I have seen and played) show facts without bias and opinion on the war. It doesn't call the enemy bad nor makes fun of them. It just shows what the war looked like and provides a good shooter game. Last time I checked it was Call of Duty: World at War not Call of Duty: HAHA

If we line up the true argument theirs a few holes on your side.

 

[dragonburner]

911 killed civilians and destroyed families. What if I ripped on your dad getting blown up unprovoked.

And what about all the "Non-American" Families that get blown every time america decides to invade somewhere?

know your facts. Is there a game where you do a blitz on London or something? No! War games are just about war with a little history in between missions. A 911 game would be about blowing up people in a terrorist strike.

*cough*GTA:london *cough*

*cough*Stupid Kid*cough*

 

[Shycte]

I think that many developers start off with controversial game to gain publicity. There is no such thing as a bad publicity.

Of course there is exeptions like when developers tryes to give out an political statement.

 

[bad rider]

911 killed civilians and destroyed families. What if I ripped on your dad getting blown up unprovoked.

And what about all the "Non-American" Families that get blown every time america decides to invade somewhere?

know your facts. Is there a game where you do a blitz on London or something? No! War games are just about war with a little history in between missions. A 911 game would be about blowing up people in a terrorist strike.

*cough*GTA:london *cough*

*cough*Stupid Kid*cough*

What it's a legitmate point, but if we want to start mud slinging, your smelly.