PETITION: Continue to sell Grand Theft Auto 5 in Australia
- Thread starter SkullCap
- Start date
Recommended Videos
There is very little distinction between the two when you get right down to it, and i know that the exact definition of censorship has probably been the most contentious point in this entire discussion, but i have to go with the definition of censorship as legally mandated. This is more of a boycott than anything else, they have whined and whined until the shops have simply given in, most likely under the assumption that they can score some media attention at this hectic time of year by removing a product they probably didn't expect to sell well (i didn't even know it was cheaper until it was removed, they probably didn't expect to compete with other outlets in this division).Signa said:
I would be lying if i said this doesn't bother me though, especially the way they have seen their victory and decided they are now green lit to turn this simple petition into a crusade against any other outlet they feel will bend.
EDIT: Despite how much i want them to fail, i really don't think this will amount to all that much. I would rather they didn't get the message that they can control what games a store can sell, but i doubt any stores other than these big chain stores that probably make most of their money in other areas will bend. Especially around Christmas time, they are apparently planning to go after JB HI-FI, but with GTA 5 probably being one of the most sought after games at the moment, i don't believe any outlet that holds any degree of influence over gaming would dare risk the sales loss. The more shops bend to their whims, the more reasons there are for other stores to fill the void.
Not the same, imagine if supermarkets stopped stocking pork because of petitions asking them to stop stocking Halal/Kosher food because its bad for society. Thats the situation here, its not simple supply and demand its the beliefs of one group affecting other consumers.BloatedGuppy said:
Was this supposed to sound less grounded than the other claims? Because it really doesn't.Signa said:
OMG. Do yo have a petition I can sign? This sort of censorship cannot be tolerated!Loonyyy said:
Wait, now I'm confused. Don't you want my support?
Okay, that was good.
I think that's what kills me most about these threads. It comes off as "look! Someone's lying about us! We despise dishonesty. I know, LET'S LIE ABOUT THEM!"
I often wonder how people can do this without cognitive dissonance.
The failure to stock pork because it's not popular is still the beliefs of one group affecting other consumers.J Tyran said:
No, they did not. Well, unless the upper management of The Warehouse Group has a woman involved in which case holy shit, the rabbit hole is deeper than I thought.Zachary Amaranth said:
But nah, the decision to pull all R18 stuff from The Warehouse was made by management under no pressure, which is worse (At least in my eyes) than caving to the demands of a few upset people who petition it for a quick good PR kick.
You guys are getting too hung up on the definition of censorship.
Freedom of speech as a concept is bigger than only the government silencing you or not. A person or organization can also be for or against the idea that other people may express themselves and take measures.
I believe that opinions and works of fiction should always be allowed to be expressed freely. It is the only real freedom ordinary people will ever have and it should be cherished.
Companies deciding to pull works of fiction from their shelves just because they want to decide what's good for you, isn't that much better than your government making that decision for you. Sure you have alternatives if only a few companies do it (yet), but such patronization should never be applauded.
Freedom of speech as a concept is bigger than only the government silencing you or not. A person or organization can also be for or against the idea that other people may express themselves and take measures.
I believe that opinions and works of fiction should always be allowed to be expressed freely. It is the only real freedom ordinary people will ever have and it should be cherished.
Companies deciding to pull works of fiction from their shelves just because they want to decide what's good for you, isn't that much better than your government making that decision for you. Sure you have alternatives if only a few companies do it (yet), but such patronization should never be applauded.
curious, how is that worse? They came to a uniform decision based on their own internal beliefs for their own store(s), they didn't cave to someone elses who didn't have interest in those products in the first place.Sassafrass said:
It's been done to death, but I'd be more than happy to make an example similar to the situation that isn't loaded with GTA and "teh womeenz prahztitoots."
Well, there really wasn't much of a reason given, outside of "We've been debating doing this for a long time." and it's the entirety of their R18 stock, not just a single game that was taken down in one store being petitioned to do so.gmaverick019 said:
Now admittedly, both stores are well within in their rights to do what they wish with stock but, in my eyes at least, selling R18 stuff while internally debating whether to pull it then pulling it is a bigger mis-step in my eyes then listening to a petition for one game and pulling that game off the shelf. But maybe I'm just weird like that. *Shrugs*
to me personally, it's about context and reasoning, you could hear someone say "that man's been shot!" and you'd think "oh shit, is he gonna be okay? I hope the other asshole goes to prison" but then later on you learn the reasoning is the man being shot was trying to kill the other guy with a knife, and it was purely in self defense, which to some people makes it okay, or you at least see why it happened that way.Sassafrass said:
We have stores around here (you may have something similar) that sells adult items (dildos/porn/fleshlights/everything under the sun in that regard), if I walked in as a straight male, and found the female strap ons for male penetration and male penetration porn videos horrifying and they shouldn't be sold there, and the company caved to me and a couple of my bro douchebags, would you find that more ridiculous than then simply them not selling the female strap ons and male penetration videos due to internal reasons?
off-topic there, but while I think neither real world scenario is good for NZ/AU consumers, I more or less don't like it when other consumers, who wouldn't be interested in the products in the first place, can actively prevent/pressure (no, the target petition didn't actively prevent, they simply pressured the store into not selling it) other consumers from making purchases possibly more accustomed to them.
well jensen, your body is pretty fucked up as it is, I can only imagine the freaky r18+ shit you like to watch
THEY DO SELL IT IN AUSTRALIA!!
just not at Target
how many of you bought your games at target?
I mean [i/]yes[/i] the killing of prostitutes is not forced onto the player, its completely voluntary on their part
but its not like GTA has the best representation of women, I mean can we at least acknowledge that?
just not at Target
how many of you bought your games at target?
this probably isn;t relevant to the "principle" of the thing but I don't think this is a serious misstep like the "virtul alien sex simulator" accusations the original Mass Effect got from FauxGabeZhul said:
I mean [i/]yes[/i] the killing of prostitutes is not forced onto the player, its completely voluntary on their part
but its not like GTA has the best representation of women, I mean can we at least acknowledge that?
That's all fair and good, but the issue has become the fact that the internet in its infinite wisdom has decided that this somehow is "censorship".GabeZhul said:
Well, first off, all instances of man-on-woman violence being removed from the game. Or removal of sexual encounters with prostitutes. More broadly, the removal of weapons or alteration of script due to swears. Any actual tangible change to the game's content caused directly by the complaints of an outside source is at least far more worthy of being called "censorship" than this. Though by the technical meaning of the word even all of that hardly applies if it's a change being actively made by the developer themselves. Trivializing the meaning of the term with the "Self-censorship is still censorship!" argument does nothing to help us if you ask me.Signa said:
More specifically, I should think I've already made this obvious but I would consider it to be censorship if the governing body of Australia had seen this and stepped in to decide "Oh hey, no, you guys can't sell Grand Theft Auto anymore." Or if they had initially declined to classify Grand Theft Auto in the first place, thus preventing it from being sold at all within the country.
A little disingenuous perhaps? Surely you're not so determined to stick to your point that you cannot see the difference between market forces and ideology/belief structure driven group-think forcing a product off the shelves, thats one hell of a difference from people simply not liking a product and you know it.Zachary Amaranth said:
One is the mechanics of supply and demand leading retailers to come to the decision no-one or not enough people are buying a product.
The other is a select group of consumers trying to make sure no-one can buy a product, whichever way you you try to spin it the two are nothing alike.
No. I don't have a clipboard. I bet Target also doesn't sell them.Zachary Amaranth said:
Wait, now I'm confused. Don't you want my support?[/quote]
I don't even know what I want. But seriously, I'm sick of seeing poll inflation on the internet when things get shared on social media, like say, the GG support poll on this site, or people in the US complaining about the actions of Target Australia (At least in this case where it's fairly benign).
And I'm also sick of seeing the same people assuming they're the most informed, useful person, to causes they know nothing about. Women lead the fight for women, queers (And I mean all of us, whatever letter, acronym or descriptor we're under) lead the fight for queers and so on. Being told that as an Australian man, I'm a part of a group being killed by guns all the time, or that my access to GTA V HD is being prevented is fucking irritating, because it's all lies, and if they listened to us for a second they'd know it.
I'm inordinately proud of that one.
Indeed. I'm sick of these people not even quoting these things that are lies. At least people were referencing her words when people were lying about Sarkeesian and toxic masculinity, they're not even bothering here, so I went through the entire petition and illustrated everything I found wrong about it for the sake of consistency. And they'll have my signature the minute they stop being so scummy.
I really think it's the GG thing. It's exactly the same damn calling card. It might as well have a note with my address signed "Mike Cernovich", or slander me as SWATting people like JohnFei did.
What, am I not allowed to dictate what a store is allowed to sell or not sell if I don't buy from it and have no plans to buy from it and have no power over that store by claiming I won't buy from it when I wouldn't have bought from it anyway and them even giving me what I want won't actually make me buy from it anyway? You almost kind of sound like a fascist. [/sarcasm]Loonyyy said:
Bolded for emphasis, all the Aussie gamers this is applicable to seem to be in agreement that this is not censorship and doesn't matter too much either way.
Let's not forget GTA still doesn't allow you solicit sex from and kill male prostitutes. You'd get at least some of these people on your side if this were true, while others would still have problems that the game still allows for you to basically still kill unarmed people you can have interactions with. And yes, GTA is not representing all or even a good number of genders, just the two most common ones. But then again, you can always be of the opinion of "there's only 2 genders!", which I think is a pretty extreme case to make that, almost analogous to saying there is X numbers of races and there's no debate over it.
And was in a kid's section of the magazine, while still having that R18+ rating, so someone screwed up big time on that because I can find at least several ways to be outraged by that, but I choose laughter. Also, GTA is kind of synonymous with being played, not by older men, but mostly teenage boys that want that simulation of a crime lifestyle. That's a lot of MA games' biggest problem, despite being for "adults", marketing basically caters to teenagers, specifically males. Do we not remember the Dead Space 2 commercials and how much it reinforced that view?
Uh, for this claim, I will submit, but the claim games have no negative effects and can not do so are BS. I like this study/link: http://psychcentral.com/news/2012/12/11/negative-effects-of-violent-video-games-may-build-over-time/48918.html and this one: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bbushman/BH06.pdf quite a bit. Gaming and other media exposure can have negative consequences and psychologists are finding more everyday with even internet media.
Also generally making the women borderline defenseless and most the men able to put up a fight is kind of wrong. To my knowledge, no one bashes that you're able to kill both men and women in say, the Bioshock series because both are usually on equal playing ground, but when the women are essentially made defenseless in many sandbox games and you're still able to kill them I'm willing to say getting offended or PO'd is understandable. Also doesn't help prostitutes are essentially a guilty pleasure experience within game just to make it more extreme.
and behavior, specifically aggression in most cases.
Off/On Topic:
3. Screw the antitheists' reaction to this being that they wanted the Bible banned from Target. Seriously, just take all that effort into Australia and that problem if you care and don't basically do the same thing to a different target because Christians and Bible readers didn't do this nor are you claiming they are, so maybe pick a more apt Target[footnote] I think I made a pun.
[/footnote]
I would not go so far as to call it "censorship," but I went ahead and signed it anyway. It was well within Target's rights to stop selling the game, true, but I don't think it's right that they did so by caving into the pressure of some (read: many) misguided individuals. No, I'm not an Australian, and no, this kind of thing would not likely happen in the United States.
It might sound strange, but I think Change.org makes it too easy to support a cause. No, maybe that just sounds stupid. But in just one minute, I've "supported" at least ten causes with a click of a button.
It might sound strange, but I think Change.org makes it too easy to support a cause. No, maybe that just sounds stupid. But in just one minute, I've "supported" at least ten causes with a click of a button.
You'd probably enjoy reading some of Zhukov and Zack's posts in the other thread. I think it'd still be problematic, but then the stupid invoking of GTA letting you kill almost anyone wouldn't be so on the nose. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.866306-Target-Australia-will-no-longer-stock-GTA5?page=1Skatologist said:
It's like in "Thank you for smoking" when they're selling cigarettes to children despite cigarettes only being available to over 18s. The target ad was a laugh. GTA being for adults is a good laugh. You know when I want to get something seriously for adults, my girlfriend and I have to go to a store which is underground and has blacked out windows and checks ID.
If I wanted to go to a bar or gambling area in Australia, I'd have to be 18 just to be in the room, or with an adult leading me to get a counter meal. GTA is in the section with games for teaching your kids to read.
There's also a long intellectual tradition of how media and culture affect attitudes of individuals, and what exposure to different media does. Gaming also often involves aggression, and people giving vent to anti-social impulses feeling they're free from a social filter, which just makes them shittier people the more they do it.
Honestly, the big thing here I think is that straight guys are fucking stupid as a whole, and entirely unsophisticated sexually. They don't understand they're being pandered to, and lack the self respect and restraint to be insulted. And so they like, and want strip clubs and hookers in their games, and they don't ask why they're in so many games, and they don't question their inclusion in the first place. That's why it's "realism" that these attempts at sticking edgy in there, but the realism doesn't extend to STDs, being shot by a pimp who thought you weren't paying, being mugged whilst in your alley, or why there aren't male prostitutes or strippers.
Again, we're not your motherfucking shield. If any of these American assholes had asked Australians about it, they'd ask them why they were fucking buying games at Target. And next they'd probably get a rant about the fucking industries bullshit where they charge us more for the games, and how that's the real thing standing between Australians and their games. $100 fucking AUD compared to $60 USD, and that didn't change even when the AUD was trading higher than the USD.and behavior, specifically aggression in most cases.
Off/On Topic:
3. Screw the antitheists' reaction to this being that they wanted the Bible banned from Target. Seriously, just take all that effort into Australia and that problem if you care and don't basically do the same thing to a different target because Christians and Bible readers didn't do this nor are you claiming they are, so maybe pick a more apt Target[footnote] I think I made a pun.
Antitheists can generally be relied on to be stupid, terrible people.
Of course, if the game had just not been restocked because it wasn't selling, no-one would give a shit. If a dedicated game shop refused to stock shitty learning games and DS shovelware, we'd be fucking celebrating. Instead, it's all censorship and book burnings, and not double checking that you're not, I don't know, insulting survivors of sexual assault in the incessant struggle for games to be free, and for a million fucking manchildren to stand strong and reject any impulse to better themselves. Oh, and also to lie their damn asses off, because even they realise the truth makes us look like sick fucks and doesn't help our point, that a horrible sexual assault is a joke in videogames about getting health back.
1) It was a parody response to poke fun at the assertion that "decisions were made and now you can't buy the game at Target = Censorship".J Tyran said:
2) No, it would be like if one particular chain of supermarkets stopped stocking pork because of petitions asking them to stop stocking pork for said religious reasons.
3) The beliefs of other consumers affect me all the time. It is, for instance, why I cannot buy sex toys at Walmart.
4) I've already stated about three times I think the original petition was stupid.
The fuck? This isn't a freedom of speech issue either. That game is still there to be purchased. No one stopped them from making it. A single chain of stores pulled the game from the shelves.veloper said:
For heavens sake guys, you can be against the original petition in principle without going full Chicken Little and invoking "censorship" or "freedom of speech". It's not the sentiment that you dislike the mentality behind the petition that bothers me, it's the hyperbole and lack of perspective. It's no different than the type someone invoked the "First they came" poem for DRM practices, or the time someone compared themselves to Rosa Parks because the SWTOR live team changed their name from Bubba Fett stating copyright purposes. You sound out to lunch. And when you sound out to lunch, no one takes you seriously. And rather than frowning at the petition that got the game pulled off shelves, they're going to frown at you and wonder if you've lost your minds.