325 réponses à ce sujet

[REgentleman]

I very much disagree with the notion that video games should be about entertainment only. I think video games should literally be about whatever their developers want them to be, and that a video game that dares to make one actually uncomfortable, given it has a point to make by doing so, should be applauded, as much as any other form of media should.

[AngelicMachinery]

rapscallioness wrote...

Well, as a card carrying member of "concerned mother's brigade", or the "b*tchy mom's" club, I gotta tell ya I'm about tired of being disrespected on here. "B*tchy" moms are the reason you're here at all; "b*tchy" moms are the most lethal and dangerous creatures in any species if they think their cubs are being threatened; "b*tchy" moms will gladly give thier lives for you if it means you'll be okay.

Ease up on the moms.

As far as the OP, and seeing kids in the game.....what age exactly are we talking about? 16-17, I don't consider them to be kids anymore. 9-10? No, I don't want to see a 9 year old get shot up in front of my eyes on my video game.

Sure Bioware's free to make it, and I'm free not buy it. I'd hate that because I love ME.

Is it realsitic? Yeah, sure. This crap is happening as we speak, but I don't want to see it. I don't want to see it on CNN.

So to what extent are we talking? Little kids scurrying around helping the resistance? Maybe getting in and out of places that adults can't fit in to? I could see that, I just don't want to see them get killed. You can imply something, allude to it without having to explicitly show it.

Oftentimes, it's the things that are left to the imagination that are much more emotionally powerful.

I apologize.  It wasn’t my intention to attack parents,  I just couldn’t think of a better figure to use in my arguments.  I suppose I could use fathers,  but,  I typically don’t see them get up in arms about issues unless it somehow affects them in a much more personal way.  Truthfully, be they mothers, fathers, politicians or religious folk I’m against the idea of video games never truly maturing.  I would like to see it reach the point where it is seen as a serious medium such as film,  but, we won’t really get there unless it’s allowed to grow and part of that is allowing it to tackle mature subject matters tastefully.

As I've said,  I could care less about child soldiers being implimented.  What I care about is people saying no because "You can't do that in video games."

[dreman9999]

VegasVance wrote...

How the fawk has this not been locked?
No. Period. End of Story. Certain things ended in the 90's. Kids getting killed in an environment controllable by the player is one of them. VHS was the other.

Why would a topic that people are reasonably debating over without harassing anyone be locked?

[VegasVance]

dreman9999 wrote...

VegasVance wrote...

How the fawk has this not been locked?
No. Period. End of Story. Certain things ended in the 90's. Kids getting killed in an environment controllable by the player is one of them. VHS was the other.

Why would a topic that people are reasonably debating over without harassing anyone be locked?

It's something that will not happen.  Period. Video games have yet to be taken as seriously as film and other art forms. When they are recognized as so I'm all for it, but until that day I'm not for Bioware getting itself banned off the shelves.  Or any other mainstream game for that matter, it is a poor fiscal descion, because it takes away time from other parts of the game to create a scenrio like that and even more time when they are told by the production company to cut out the content. 

[REgentleman]

Dude, it's already happened. People can moan about it all they want, but kids have already died in video games. Why would we go back now? Because some sensationalist douchers in the media raise a storm and try to get it banned, likely not accomplishing anything besides embarrassing themselves in the process? If it's got the content of an M game, which can and does sometimes include deadly violence against children, why should we be so afraid?

I don't really understand the "it takes time away from other things in the game" argument. If it's a good part of the game, and the game itself is good, then why would we deny it to ourselves? If I couldn't have faith in Bioware to be capable of handling the subject appropriately, I would give up the ghost altogether. I'd like to think the game's in good enough hands for it.

Modifié par REgentleman, 04 juillet 2011 - 07:10 .

[VegasVance]

REgentleman wrote...

Dude, it's already happened. People can moan about it all they want, but kids have already died in video games. Why would we go back now? Because some sensationalist douchers in the media raise a storm and try to get it banned, likely not accomplishing anything besides embarrassing themselves in the process? If it's got the content of an M game, which can and does sometimes include deadly violence against children, why should we be so afraid?

Not afraid, rational about it.  The Fallout games were not very popular at the time of their relase, they were devolped in house and went under the radar.  Mass Effect already got spot lighted with the first relase, something like this would be much worse, not as in "bad" PR, more like banned for sale.  EA would force bioware to either be dropped or to drop the content, period. 

As for the it taking up more time argument.  Its simple, if the content isn't allowed and is the reason why the game would be banned it will get cut out.  All the work that was spent implementing the cut content will be for waste.  

Modifié par VegasVance, 04 juillet 2011 - 07:16 .

[REgentleman]

Really? They would?

They wouldn't dare.

..would they? What's their track record on this kind of thing? I thought I heard, at some point in time, that EA was determined to be hands-off with bioware on Mass Effect. That was a really long time ago, though, I guess I don't know how that actually played out.

[Sylvianus]

It seems that we will see a child die in M3. So ?

[VegasVance]

REgentleman wrote...

Really? They would?

They wouldn't dare.

..would they? What's their track record on this kind of thing? I thought I heard, at some point in time, that EA was determined to be hands-off with bioware on Mass Effect. That was a really long time ago, though, I guess I don't know how that actually played out.

Something like that EA would step in.  And as for the issuse as a whole there is a distinct difference between children just dying, and children dying because they been conscripted into the army. 

[Sylvianus]

Many assumptions, few facts. I don't see what you are relying on to say that Mass Effect will be affected. It wasn't the case in M1. And since the old time that Gta is abused by politics, sales have never been affected. Therefore they also don't care what it is said about them and they continue to do what they do.

They know it has little impact.

[dreman9999]

VegasVance wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

VegasVance wrote...

How the fawk has this not been locked?
No. Period. End of Story. Certain things ended in the 90's. Kids getting killed in an environment controllable by the player is one of them. VHS was the other.

Why would a topic that people are reasonably debating over without harassing anyone be locked?

It's something that will not happen.  Period. Video games have yet to be taken as seriously as film and other art forms. When they are recognized as so I'm all for it, but until that day I'm not for Bioware getting itself banned off the shelves.  Or any other mainstream game for that matter, it is a poor fiscal descion, because it takes away time from other parts of the game to create a scenrio like that and even more time when they are told by the production company to cut out the content. 

*Looks at Bioshock, briad and limbo*
Video have beenlooked at as art. We even had legal debate over it in California. Video game won out out over the fact the it's a form of expression.
 Heck, in Bioshock you can do worse to children than make them fight in war and Limbo is about a boy dieing over and over agein. And both games were cosidered art forms as well as ME. You won't be very populer on this forum if you think that video games aren't art.

[dreman9999]

VegasVance wrote...

REgentleman wrote...

Really? They would?

They wouldn't dare.

..would they? What's their track record on this kind of thing? I thought I heard, at some point in time, that EA was determined to be hands-off with bioware on Mass Effect. That was a really long time ago, though, I guess I don't know how that actually played out.

Something like that EA would step in.  And as for the issuse as a whole there is a distinct difference between children just dying, and children dying because they been conscripted into the army. 

*Looks to DA:O*
 You do know that DA you can kill children and case the death of children, and it was publised under a EA banner.

[VegasVance]

I've never been worried about angry mother brigade per say, but if they do get the attention of those in power who regulate what goes into their country, they will loose profit.
http://en.wikipedia....ned_video_games

[Medhia Nox]

I'd be curious to know how many people want to see "children during war time" and what your responses have been on any of the threads suggesting Shepard show emotion.

[AngelicMachinery]

In Baldurs Gate two, you can make armor out of human skin.

Video games seem to have gotten so much tamer recently...

[AngelicMachinery]

Medhia Nox wrote...

I'd be curious to know how many people want to see "children during war time" and what your responses have been on any of the threads suggesting Shepard show emotion.

I'm fine with Shepard showing emotion as long as I have a choice in the matter.  If my steely Renegade breaks down into tears I will be dissapoint,  but my bleeding heart pargon I approve.

[dreman9999]

VegasVance wrote...

I've never been worried about angry mother brigade per say, but if they do get the attention of those in power who regulate what goes into their country, they will loose profit.
http://en.wikipedia....ned_video_games

In Bioshock, you could kill little girls to gat more power......Bioshock has been yet to be banned.
Also, those game were banned because of sex and violance that the country beleived to ne too extreme. Child solders would not be under that.

Modifié par dreman9999, 04 juillet 2011 - 07:49 .

[Medhia Nox]

@AngelicMachinery: There's more than one way to show emotion though. Not everyone who shows their feelings has to break down into a blubbering mass (though, I'm pretty sure that's what you're getting at).

I'd have Renegade Shepard show his emotions through self-destructive behaviors - everyone has them, and people who repress them destroy themselves (hey, don't blame me - blame biology).

But still - someone who has a moment of emotional release doesn't have to be a bleeding heart softy.

====

As for Bioshock - the little sisters were a HUGE part of the storyline.

In ME - having a handful of children in a cutscene get mowed down - is definitely not the same thing.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 04 juillet 2011 - 07:41 .

[Sylvianus]

dreman9999 wrote...

VegasVance wrote...

I've never been worried about angry mother brigade per say, but if they do get the attention of those in power who regulate what goes into their country, they will loose profit.
http://en.wikipedia....ned_video_games

In Bioshock, you could kill little girls to gat more power......Bioshock has been yet to be banned.

And Dragon age with Connor ? We don't even see a child die,  we kill him. 

[VegasVance]

dreman9999 wrote...

VegasVance wrote...

I've never been worried about angry mother brigade per say, but if they do get the attention of those in power who regulate what goes into their country, they will loose profit.
http://en.wikipedia....ned_video_games

In Bioshock, you could kill little girls to gat more power......Bioshock has been yet to be banned.

You tap them on the forehead, the screen glows bright, do it enough you get a bad ending.
Not to mention that they aren't little at all given the lore, oh and they aren't children forced to fight and be killed.

In dragon age you stand awkwardly over him and don't see a thing on screen. 

Modifié par VegasVance, 04 juillet 2011 - 07:47 .

[Medhia Nox]

@Sylvanius - again, that entire section was about Conner. It wasn't just a throw away scene where some little boy gets demon possessed and you cut him down.

There's a huge difference between art and cheap emotion.

If you want a huge section of ME 3 to be about wartime - and Shepard's interaction with regular people during war - and some of those people happen to be children bearing arms. Then I'm all for it.

If you want Shepard to be on the battlefield and there's a cut scene where some children with guns get mowed down... no thanks, that's puerile shock value.

[AngelicMachinery]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@AngelicMachinery: There's more than one way to show emotion though. Not everyone who shows their feelings has to break down into a blubbering mass (though, I'm pretty sure that's what you're getting at).

I'd have Renegade Shepard show his emotions through self-destructive behaviors - everyone has them, and people who repress them destroy themselves (hey, don't blame me - blame biology).

I wasn't particularly clear I suppose,  I would prefer a control over a characters emotional responce.  I don't want it to be something that is just thrust upon Shepard out of nowhere.  I already try to attribute emotions and motivations to the different Shepard's I play...  i simply don't want to lose my immersion (Oh god I used that word) if Shepard starts acting in ways I believe she shouldn't.

[dreman9999]

VegasVance wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

VegasVance wrote...

I've never been worried about angry mother brigade per say, but if they do get the attention of those in power who regulate what goes into their country, they will loose profit.
http://en.wikipedia....ned_video_games

In Bioshock, you could kill little girls to gat more power......Bioshock has been yet to be banned.

You tap them on the forehead, the screen glows bright, do it enough you get a bad ending.
Not to mention that they aren't little at all given the lore, oh and they aren't children forced to fight and be killed.

In dragon age you stand awkwardly over him and don't see a thing on screen. 

And has anyone yet stated they wanted to see children kill in ME? No. Children fight anf die in the game, they don't have to show them dieing. Anything like that can be done off screen. You complate was have child soldier in the game mean violence on children, but violence on children has been in games but show in vast detail just off screen. The child dieing in the ME3 demo was off screen, just like the girl in bioshock. We're not asking to see grisly deaths of children, just to show child solder in time of war. If they die, let it be off screen or in a non grusome way.
You agument waschild violence in general. I'm agrueing for some realism in extreme war time.

[Sylvianus]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Sylvanius - again, that entire section was about Conner. It wasn't just a throw away scene where some little boy gets demon possessed and you cut him down.

There's a huge difference between art and cheap emotion.

If you want a huge section of ME 3 to be about wartime - and Shepard's interaction with regular people during war - and some of those people happen to be children bearing arms. Then I'm all for it.

If you want Shepard to be on the battlefield and there's a cut scene where some children with guns get mowed down... no thanks, that's puerile shock value.

But we agree. I just protest against radical thought  to see children die or killed for reasons that have nothing to do with the production of a game.

To see children soldiers, I do not care personally. But I am not against seeing a new tragic dimension of war neither. And if it involves children, I would be delighted to see that. I hope that the war with the Reapers is as credible as possible and no one laughs about it after the release of M3.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 juillet 2011 - 07:59 .