Poll: Should games like "Super Columbine Massacre RPG!" be allowed?
- Thread starter Lucem712
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Child porn seemed an appropriate example for Mr. Slippery Slope, we cannot censor anything for any reason, back there. Because clearly we do censor some things, for perfectly sound reasons.xvbones said:
Er, no. This game was not created by McDonald's. It was created by an Italian game company, La Molleindustria, as an "anti-advergame". If you had played the game, I would believe that McDonald's does not want its consumer base thinking it buys crops away from native people (which they need to survive), put steroids in the food so the cows will grow faster and give people meaningless rewards so they will not quit.xvbones said:
Pretty much. I know I haven't played, nor am I interested in doing so, but I will defend it's right to exist, regardless of the quality of the game or how sensitively the game deals with the subject matter.Generic Gamer said:
Should it be allowed to be made? Yes; freedoms and whatnot are always important.
Should it have been made? Probably not; it's distasteful and, unless it has some sort of meaning to it other than to push it in the face of people, it probably wasn't a good idea to make it.
Should it have been made? Probably not; it's distasteful and, unless it has some sort of meaning to it other than to push it in the face of people, it probably wasn't a good idea to make it.
What kind of question is that? "Allow" a game. So you say we should BAN everything, and only "tested and approved" media can be shown?
The real question is "Should they ban this game?" And: No, not in my opinion.
The only things which SHOULD be considered ban-worthy are tools of brainwashing, purposely misinforming and re-"educating" people. {I consider most religious texts hard on the edge though *g*.}
The real question is "Should they ban this game?" And: No, not in my opinion.
The only things which SHOULD be considered ban-worthy are tools of brainwashing, purposely misinforming and re-"educating" people. {I consider most religious texts hard on the edge though *g*.}
The argument is still the same as Eminem talking shit about gay people in his lyrics. Free speech is very very important. Also, people who mention the game and use it as a teaching tool (sociology, criminal justice, et al) or who just want to understand why bullshit like this exists should be protected against harassment and surveillance by law enforcement agencies.Lucem712 said:
* * Colossal however- * *
People who obsess over the game and talk about how great it is and post in forums about how Clebold and Harris are heroes to them and they sometimes wish they had the stones to off everybody in their school should suffer the same fate as people who fill up their hard drives with animated kiddie porn and/or barely legal shit and write amateur fiction about adults having sex with minors. They should be surveilled, and perhaps harassed, by law enforcement. Several years ago I saw a news report about a porn company that made purely fictional enactments of women being beaten, raped and murdered (the beatings, however, were real, albeit consensual). The shaky legality of these films ended up being the downfall of the company, which no longer exists. When I heard this, I thought, they're interviewing a whole lot of male porn stars who seem like they're fairly nice guys who would never actually harm a woman. Why not put these guys to work weeding out those who would? So there's another reason why games like this should exist. They can be used, only with certain conditions and constraints, to identify people who are planning to kill someone.
To anyone who may get up in arms over those statements, please pay attention to the part I bolded. I'm not suggesting that some a-hole FBI agent or judge start looking at violent video games in general to identify possible criminals.
Also worth noting, and I am in no way trying to remove Clebold's or Harris' guilt, this very well may not have happened if these people weren't treated like shit everyday, and told that they already were a freak because they were different. So the greatest antidote to a potential revisiting of Columbine and similar massacres is still not treating the person who lives near you or attends school with you, whom you suspect may be a little crazy, as if they are a freakjob and deserve no respect.
But again, we don't actually censor child porn, it is outright illegal. You get arrested for it. It is like cocaine. We don't censor cocaine. We arrest people for possession, transport and sale of cocaine.BloatedGuppy said:
Granted, 'drug use' gets a movie or a game an M rating, and sometimes gets censored out, but you will not ever ever ever hear about a video game that had an Adults-Only rating but got back down to M because they took out all the child porn.
You may bring up hentai games if you like, however before you do; in America you can be arrested for possession of child pornography for having those on your computer.
Mr Slippery Slope has a reason to use that term, as it is an actual thing, it's just that it's actually called 'legal precedence'.
What those two words mean is that similar cases to this one will likely go the same way. A lawyer will bring it up and a judge will be aware of it and a dangerous precedence can be set.
That is why I say knee-jerk things like 'this is protected, this is not debatable'.
It's just that swinging all the way to child porn as 'things we shouldn't permit the censorship of' is way way way too far. With respect, it's just not relevant to this discussion. We do not treat child porn with censorship, we treat it as a felony.
)
Yes absolutely. It is up to the consumer to determine what is offensive, not the Government. I don't care what the game is, it could be about killing orphans with puppies and kittens as clubs, it should not be banned. I, personally, would not play it nor would anyone else I hope but that doesn't mean it should be banned.
Yes, if ammo-junkies get to have their carbon copy rehashes of war games like call of duty and halo, and sports-addicts get to have their roster updates every year with a new 60 dollar copy of madden NFL, then games that portray other real life events should be allowed as well.
That said, would I play this game myself? Probably not. It doesn't look like an accurate representation of the game (demons from hell, are you fuckign serious?!), it looks like nothing more than a tasteless joke from someone who decided to learn RPGmaker 2003 on a whim.
That said, would I play this game myself? Probably not. It doesn't look like an accurate representation of the game (demons from hell, are you fuckign serious?!), it looks like nothing more than a tasteless joke from someone who decided to learn RPGmaker 2003 on a whim.
I was in a school shooting but i still think theses games should not be censored even if they are mocking or in any way disrespectful to the victims because the second we start censoring anything anyone can censor us.
but in my opinion no one should make a game about a school shooting it is just so unfathomably tragic.
but in my opinion no one should make a game about a school shooting it is just so unfathomably tragic.
I don't know if it's any good and it's not something I feel like playing at the moment. But if we ban this, shouldn't we also ban other games based on real world tragedies? Like, you know, every World War II game ever, Wolfenstein and Rick Dangerous included?
Freedom of speech does have its boundaries, of course, but I'm not keen on tightening them, even if it means I have to deal with questionable material from time to time.
Freedom of speech does have its boundaries, of course, but I'm not keen on tightening them, even if it means I have to deal with questionable material from time to time.
Child porn is a felony, but presumably at some point it was decided that it would be a felony, yes? That wasn't divine mandate. At some point, a legal precedent was set that no, this was a felony, full stop. No freedom of expression laws apply here. So, there you go. You're now on the slippery slope, if you're following that line of fallacious thinking. Which is why you can't go around shouting "Slippery Slope" when you're arguing hypotheticals.xvbones said:
Without knowing the content of the game, without knowing if its libelous, without knowing if any laws regarding obscenity are being broken, we can't really speak to whether or not it's defensible under "Freedom of Speech", and thus my original comment that a shitload of people who aren't familiar with the game are going to "Robble Robble Freedom of Speech" without having any idea whatsoever if the laws regarding Freedom of Speech actually apply to it and its content.
I will freely admit that I definitely could have and should have said that better. I'm gonna try and salvage this ok?BloatedGuppy said:
No, I am not trying to say that you should be able to do and say whatever you want consequence free, that would be stupid. Making something like child pron (to use your example) illegal has valid arguments behind it like the fact that for the most part children don't understand what sex is and therefore can't really consent to it. "It's offensive to people" on the other hand is not a valid argument for making anything illegal whether it's a horrible game or film that exists solely to offend people, a symbol that has bad connotations or something small like yellow paint jobs on cars (Which I personally find very offensive).
Also to my 'slippery-slope' statement, again I'll admit I probably shouldn't have said that (or at least worded it differently), but this is literally the only situation I've ever encountered where it makes even the slightest amount of sense. Doesn't make it a good argument, I'm just saying it makes sense to me.
Should we have freedom of speech? Y/N
You can copy your answer to this question to your question, because in the end it is the same question.
You can copy your answer to this question to your question, because in the end it is the same question.