Dog-Fighting Game Pulled from Android Market
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It's Google's right to decide if they're gonna sell it or not, so I don't see the issue here. It's like writing a book and, when a publisher rejects your draft, you complain about free speech. I also think that if someone else picks it up and sells it, that's fine too. It would be hypocritical to protest that when I am also defending my right to play a game where I interactively saw my own limbs off (Heavy Rain). Once again I have to mention (and agree with) Tarantino's statement that violence in movies (and by extention videogames) is purely aesthetic, there is no morality factor to it.
Yeah, let's not do the "kid" thing again, we're all tired of it. We can't make the world kid-proof. Be a good parent or watch your kids turn to shit, sorry, in the real world, the adult world, negligence has a price. Deal with it.John Funk said:
Actually millions of birds die every year from collisions with ancient medieval buildings.John Funk said:
Please support our efforts to have these deadly, offending structures removed for the safety and happiness of our feathered friends.
The More You Know
Though I don't wish to look like TOO big a c**t for asking this, two thoughts:
1. No dogs were harmed in the making or playing of it (hopefully)
2. Where's the dividing line between this and GTA (pick up prostitutes then murder them...) or Pokémon (capture a wide variety of seemingly sentient animals and force them to fight to the "faint", which doesn't seem far off from death really)? Or even The Sims? (Lead your guys to light themselves on fire, watch as they die)
Just because the 3D sprites are different and a touch too realistic for your tastes?
NB I have no desire to play the game and still find the subject matter a bit distasteful, but I detect an air of hypocrisy... In all seriousness, how many of the people yelling "that's not cool" here also cried foul when Germany banned Carmageddon until the people you can run down were retconned into zombies and given green blood, or when Thrill Kill was banned pretty much everywhere?
1. No dogs were harmed in the making or playing of it (hopefully)
2. Where's the dividing line between this and GTA (pick up prostitutes then murder them...) or Pokémon (capture a wide variety of seemingly sentient animals and force them to fight to the "faint", which doesn't seem far off from death really)? Or even The Sims? (Lead your guys to light themselves on fire, watch as they die)
Just because the 3D sprites are different and a touch too realistic for your tastes?
NB I have no desire to play the game and still find the subject matter a bit distasteful, but I detect an air of hypocrisy... In all seriousness, how many of the people yelling "that's not cool" here also cried foul when Germany banned Carmageddon until the people you can run down were retconned into zombies and given green blood, or when Thrill Kill was banned pretty much everywhere?
I am inclined to agree with your thinking there...condemning it as a game sounds like when ppl were going nuts over that "controversial" level in MW2 (I think), where you killed those innocent civilians (I only heard of it, never actually played it). Like all other games, you don't lik it, let the publisher know buy ignoring it.AC10 said:
This is so stupid. It's wrong to make dogs fight each other in real life but, translating that into thinking that it shouldn't be allowed in other forms like video games annoys me. Why not? Does anyone suffer because these pixels are 'killing' each other? No, I didn't think so. It's no worse then watching a movie about dogs killing each other. It's also not any worse than watching a movie or playing a video game where we get to kill other humans. This is just dumb.
Still, you join the outrage in this matter, quite enthusiastically at that, yet I'm pretty sure you condemn/ridicule others when they do it in matters considering the murder of say, soldiers in games, which we're pretty accustomed to by now. The "pretty sure" part is only there cause I'm not sure who wrote the articles in question, but your best case scenario is that you're contradicting other authors (and considering the amount of articles on anti-gaming freakouts over the years around here, my bet is you wrote at least one of them).John Funk said:
This article reeks of hypocrisy.
Hardy har har :>HankMan said:
OT: I bet its been said, but this seems stupid to me. With all the "murder simulators" aka FPS games...this is too cruel? LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAME. A game is a game. No dogs were hurt in the making of that game, I'm sure. And barring the possibility that they used real dogs and motioncaptured the whole game in a real dogfight, censoring it seems the pinnacle of stupidity.
I have no interest in playing this game, but I sure think that if someone has, its MUCH better that they play this than go out and do actual dogfights. Stupid humanity is stupid.
Next thing you know all dog-like pokemon have to be removed from the game. If I remember correctly animal rights groups have complained about pokemon. Though nothing came of it.