32 réponses à ce sujet

[Rubbish Hero]

The thing that made it disturbing I think was not the fact you were killing civilizations but the way it was depicted.

[Daemongar]

Nah, it is nothing more than a corporation garnering revenue by any means necessary. There is no art, there is no "furthering of the story", its a gimmick to sell. I guess that's what people want to spend their money on, or what their marketing department decided would garner the most "viral marketing." Anyone who believes the company didn't know what kind of attention this would grab is not cynical enough.



Looking at the sales figures, in a couple of years this will look tame by comparison and no one will bat an eye. For my part, I ain't buying it. Feel free to call corporate schtick art, though.

[Monstruo696]

Rubbish Hero wrote...

The thing that made it disturbing I think was not the fact you were killing civilizations but the way it was depicted.

Because obviously killing civilizati-, I mean, civilians in some other manner makes it right?

and we wonder why the world is the way it is today.

[Amberyl Ravenclaw]

wrexingcrew wrote...
Yep, sorry, bad joke. 

More like I didn't get the humor, I suppose. Joke's on me then.

MrGOH wrote...

Outrage over this level is confusing to me - in GTAIV you can wantonly murder the denizens of NYC (in the guise of liberty city), in civilization you can nuke innocents whenever you please. Why is it that the act of murder and mayhem endemic to modern video games is so terrible when its rendered naked?

On my part, I've also noticed that no one really complains when your video game characters are killing "other" people from different worlds and cultures; in my limited experience, such as the level in Hitman 2 where you're in a Malaysian hotel and have the option to gun down civilians as you please, something that would be IRL reminiscent of the terror attacks in Southeast Asia and South Asia (although Hitman 2 has a white protagonist who is an assassin on a personal mission, not a suicide bomber). But I guess it has to do with how 'real' and 'familiar' people feel the situation is - like with this one, strike a little too close to home and you upset people, I guess.

Modifié par Amberyl Ravenclaw, 20 novembre 2009 - 12:13 .

[Rubbish Hero]

Monstruo696 wrote...

Rubbish Hero wrote...

The thing that made it disturbing I think was not the fact you were killing civilizations but the way it was depicted.

Because obviously killing civilizati-, I mean, civilians in some other manner makes it right?

and we wonder why the world is the way it is today.

I didn't say that at all nor did I imply it.
Perhaps you should  reserve the snarky comments for when you can fully comprehend a statement.
The depiction, not the morality itself is what is upsetting people here.

Modifié par Rubbish Hero, 20 novembre 2009 - 02:53 .

[Monstruo696]

Rubbish Hero wrote...

Monstruo696 wrote...

Rubbish Hero wrote...

The thing that made it disturbing I think was not the fact you were killing civilizations but the way it was depicted.

Because obviously killing civilizati-, I mean, civilians in some other manner makes it right?

and we wonder why the world is the way it is today.

I didn't say that at all nor did I imply it.
Perhaps you should save reserve the snarky comments for when you can fully comprehend a statement.
The depiction, not the morality itself is what is upsetting people here.

Maybe you should learn the definitions of the words you use before you use them.

[Shensi]

This isn't the first game that allows you to kill innocents. Rainbow Six comes to mind straight away. It's funny really, the amount of attention this is getting. Typical media BS there is nothing distressing about it. It's a game, the mission can be disabled and the game does not force you to shoot any of the civilians. The sweet irony of it all is that the people calling it 'disturbing' are the ones that get kicks out of blowing the **** out of armed people (like that honestly makes a difference, its still a person).



Most folk are just running for the moral high ground and they don't really know why.

[CChocobo]

Yep. It's a video game. In GTA you can run people over, shoot people, beat people [all civilians mind you] so i don't get why people are all up in arms about this. I guess people feel it's insensitive because it's a fictional portrayal of a terrorist who commits a terrorist attack. But again it's a video game, i can think of plenty of movies that have portrayed terrorists committing terrorist attacks (The Siege) no one screamed bloody murder over movies that do. If it's something that's bothersome to someone then you can choose not to play it. I look at it as a way to bring you emotionally into the game, shows you what type of people you're fighting, it also ties in with the story in the end. So no harm done, no real civilians were hurt in the making of the game. nuff said.