512 réponses à ce sujet

[F-C]

if people want to argue its fine and the parents responsability, then games that feature sex scenes and whatnot should come with large explicit -XXX-Content- stickers plastered all over the box.



because the reality of it is nearly any game that has violence in it is mature rated. call of duty 6 is mature rated and its just a shooter game for example.



so if you want to say its fine and all then you should be supporting them being explicitly labeled as sex games.

[-Area51-Silent]

So I guess R-rated movies should be reclassified XXX then?

[Banana Muffin]

F-C wrote...

Banana Muffin wrote...

F-C wrote...

they wont stop to think that for all intents and purposes their life will be over. you have a year of pregnancy then 18 years of raising the child. unless you belong to a wealthy family that can afford to take care of your child for you, this is probably going to ruin your chances of finishing high school, getting in a college, or developing a career where you can take care of yourself.

Or, you know, you could have an abortion.

But the point is that there is absolutely nothing whatsoever that points to kids having more sex if they see it in video games. If anything it's the opposite.

considering the options you presented here and the things youve said in other posts im just going to have say you have a very narrow minded view of things and its fairly useless in trying to argue anything with you.

i also wouldnt touch the option you presented here with a 10 foot pole, you do realize that many people dont consider that acceptable, at all, right?

What option? About abortion?
I presented it as an option nothing more. If you don't think it's even an option you are the narrow minded one.

[Solstorm]

I think the sexual situation in the game makes it more interesting. But since it only does it once, then the rest of the time it just fades to black. And they are not nude, and wear more clothes than it seems on a beach.

Wouldn't it have been great to have the window come up and ask if your character responds with a tentative kiss or passionate kiss? etc. Foreplay and cuddles options afterwards? Just my thoughts

[navybrandt]

The "Mature 17+" label on the back of the box clearly states "Blood, Intense Violence, Language, Partial Nudity, and Sexual Content"

[GODzilla]

I voted "Adult video games are for adults, so no." I still don't understand why many americans agree that sex is a bad bad thing, while violence is okay. Better show your 6 year old how to shoot with a gun, but keep him unaware of women and sex until he's at least 30. -.-

[Darpaek]

Banana Muffin wrote...

What option? About abortion?
I presented it as an option nothing more. If you don't think it's even an option you are the narrow minded one.

HA!  It's "never an option" until your 15 year old daughter gets knocked up.  Then these Jesus freaks always seem to "repent".

[F-C]

-Area51-Silent wrote...

So I guess R-rated movies should be reclassified XXX then?

movies use a different rating system than games, like it or not. a movie with violence only arnt usually rated R. they will get a pg-13 rating. it usually takes nudity to get an R rating.

video games however get mature rated for everything. if it has a cuss word its mature rated. if it has violence its mature rated. if it has sex its mature rated. there is little to no difference a parent can tell just by looking at the box.

if you want to support full on nudity and sex in video games, then you need to be supporting the idea that the labeling system needs to classify sex games as sex games so a parent knows what they are buying is not just another action game, but a game thats going to be having sex in it.



and banana muffin my personal opinion is you are a rather low-class person to even bring abortion up as an option of why its ok for children to have sex. i have pretty much 0 respect for you after that comment, so dont expect much of a reply from me.

Modifié par F-C, 01 décembre 2009 - 07:31 .

[Ghandorian]

navybrandt wrote...

The "Mature 17+" label on the back of the box clearly states "Blood, Intense Violence, Language, Partial Nudity, and Sexual Content"

yep and that should really have been the entirety of the conversation. It is basically summing up that these topics should be no problem for anyone over the age of 17 to deal with. ALL those things. If someone is younger than 17 it suggests someone more responsible might want to access the individual situation. If some people think that age should be dropped to 12 or 10 or something their opinions are included in the whole "Recommendation" thing.

[ZeroPlan]

I think we should all consider to wear nose-bra's. To prevent the kids to get sexually attracted by our fantastic face adornment.

[Creature 1]

Dark83 wrote...

Creature 1 wrote...

So, yes, if we move the average age of first sexual activity further on, we should see a decrease in STDs in the population, and we should see the cases that do appear being treated more rapidly. 

The current policy and attitudes in the US is blatantly and very obviously failing at this. Again - forbid it and you end up making it "adults-only", which directly adds to it being "adult" behavior, which directly leads to punk kids trying to be adult - hence sex and drinking - but without the maturity and knowledge they should have. Further, by making such behaviors forbidden, it becomes taboo to talk about it, which means they have no access to any information.

So it's either cover our kids' eyes during the naughty parts of a movie until they reach 21 or let them watch porn?  You don't think maybe we might have alternative options?  

I don't think letting kids watch whatever they like is the answer, neither do I think never mentioning sex is the answer.  We should be teaching kids the mechanics of sex, teaching them about STDs (Including that if two people who don't have STDs have sex, STDs don't magically appear!   A lot of times it seems educators try to scare kids out of having sex by misinforming them about this fact.), and teaching them about how adult relationships work so that they aren't as vulnerable to exploitation.  Date rape is a problem in the US and in Sweden (no!), and part of combating this is education of both males and females. 

[Dark83]

The issue remains that kids like to pretend they're grown ups. (I mean kids as in those snot-nosed brats in high school. ) If you say "you can only smoke if you're an adult", then you've associated being an adult with smoking - and they will want to smoke. Same with drinking, and the same with sex.

[-Area51-Silent]

I am pretty sure movies like "The Hangover" were classified as R-rated meaning you had to be atleast 17 to go see the movie. That had plenty of nudity in it (not even with in the traditional sense). I am not advocating we put hardcore sex scenes in video games, but having tasteful scenes with limited nudity would classify the same amount of promiscuity as movies with less tasteful images/scenes.



So whats worst? Polygons/pixles or the real thing?

[TileToad]

Darpaek wrote...

TileToad wrote...

Perhaps you can explain something to me..
I always thought governments were democratically chosen representatives for your countries society, whereas privately owned corporations (like stores) are greedy money making machines. Why would anyone prefer to be ruled by the latter? Or is being ruled by corporations your definition of liberty?

The people who sell products are never going to chose NOT to make money.  Depravity sells.

They may chose to limit certain transactions to certain age groups because it's Good PR - hence more money.  But to equate a merchant conforming to societal mores to be ruled by said merchants is fallacious.  American "corporations" designed Grand Theft Auto, after all.  The only greater depravities you can find in the world exist in Japan - a far more conservative and mercantilist society than America.  Your assertion also ignores that your own domestic power interests have a far greater role in choosing your "democratically chosen representatives" than you ever will individually.

Again - you'll never understand liberty.  It's not the place of government to make choices for individual conduct within society.  We do not chose representatives to govern our individual conduct (unless said conduct infringes upon another's liberty - hence making certain conduct criminal).  Your country operates under a particular mode of censorship because Bismark made a decision for you concerning your conduct a century ago.  How is THAT superior?

You seem to ignore that corporations don't look out for your personal interests either, only for a group of interest to them, so, seriously, how can you claim more liberty when they, plus your government, impose restrictions on your freedom? I hate to say this, but, if anything, you get s*****d over twice.

Btw, I wasn't the one claiming supriority here. As far as I can tell we're equally f****d.

[thegreateski]

Only nudity in this game was the Broodmother.

I guess i can see how that would cause some people to be up in arms over "sex in video games"




A few years of therapy might be more effective.

[MerinTB]

I sense another Woo lock coming on.



Just a nice dig to our friendly moderator -

What King books had you read? Here's some more to check out (aside from those many of us already mentioned to you) for all that not-sex King writes about - Carrie, Geralds Game and The Stand. They are all good novels, and there is (gasp) sex in them.



Don't hurt me, Stanley!

[F-C]

-Area51-Silent wrote...

I am pretty sure movies like "The Hangover" were classified as R-rated meaning you had to be atleast 17 to go see the movie. That had plenty of nudity in it (not even with in the traditional sense). I am not advocating we put hardcore sex scenes in video games, but having tasteful scenes with limited nudity would classify the same amount of promiscuity as movies with less tasteful images/scenes.

So whats worst? Polygons/pixles or the real thing?

well if i doubt i would buy a movie called 'the hangover' for my niece for instance.

on the other hand if i was at the store and she presented me with a box game called "dragon age:origins" and i glanced at it, saw it was a role-playing game with swords and sorcery, and saw the mature label i would assume its because it has some blood and violence in it. i would probably think thats ok, because honestly you see violence in a movie like Shrek.

then when i walked in and saw some sex scene going on and her sitting there drooling over the screen and being like "omg omg omg" i might get a little freaked out about it.


you just have to take things in context, and thats how it really is, and thats why it gets so much attention.

[johnnywillow]

Darpaek wrote...

Banana Muffin wrote...

What option? About abortion?
I presented it as an option nothing more. If you don't think it's even an option you are the narrow minded one.

HA!  It's "never an option" until your 15 year old daughter gets knocked up.  Then these Jesus freaks always seem to "repent".

Amen

[Solica]

Well - Here's what I have to say about sex in games like DA:
Personally, I think I'd prefer if the 'sex scenes' were just short cuts, closeups of two people lying close together and tenderly looking affectionally at each other, with maybe glimpses of bare shoulders to indicate that they're naked. I think that would be nice and tasteful. Personally, I think beyond that would feel a bit, well, 'tacky'.
But I would never complain on forums about anything going farther. I'd hold my mouth.

Well - Here's what I have to say about sex in videogames in general:
I can well imagine that someone might want to produce and publish videogames with sexual content in focus. I mean the sexual 'entertainment' being the main theme and purpose of the game. Frankly, I can't see anything wrong with that. I'm hardly an expert on porn, but it seems porn these days is truly disgustingly abusive and degrading (and maybe american porn in particular? If so why?). I have a hard time to see videogames failing to present a better image of sex.

Well - Here's what I think of american 'family values' way of oppression of sex. It's failing spectacularly, whatever is supposed to be the goal. American society is filled with sexually driven disasters. Teenage pregnacies, sexually driven serial killers, sexual sadists, abusive porn, prostitution, STD. Why is it that nobody ever seem to be stopping for a moment and have the thought that: "Maybe we are doing something wrong?". -Just look at what kind of sexual predators the catholic church has fostered to priests!
When children grow up, nature will have its coarse and they will develop sexual curiosity and feelings. This is wholly natural. Not only is it 100% healthy, but there is absolutely NOTHING american parents, schools, religions, politicians or media persons can do about it! Nothing! Emerging sexual interest cannot be stopped by oppression. But it can be redirected! As psychiatric research on sexual deviations, serial killers and sexual sadists indicate.

Well - Here's what I think about America and Sweden. Sweden is a lot more violent than both americans and swedes assume. US is a lot more peaceful than swedes assume.

Well - Here's what I think about Sweden's supposed "400 years of make love not war". That's total hogwash. I don't know if Sweden have all the world records, but the figures are pretty mindboggling for a nation that still exists. Sweden has had 200 years of peace yes, roughly since the Napoleon wars ended 1809. (Politically, that's so, geographically not so, since Finland was originally a part of Sweden.) But before 1809, there was almost only war. Since the break of the ancient Danish-Swedish unified kingdom back in... I don't know exactly, 1300-something?, Sweden was in almost continuos war, mostly with Denmark and Russia, but Holland, Poland and the entire catholic Europe, during the religoius wars, got their share. I believe I saw written somewhere, that but for a few weeks here and there, Sweden would have been continuosly in war for 400 years. And that for more than a whole century, 100 years, 'killed in war'  amounted to 75% of all causes of death. I haven't checked these figures, but I'm reasonably sure I read that somewhere, sometime.
(It's tempting to speculate that the 'cold', reserved behavior that is supposed to be typically swedish, is a result of the gene-pool being cleansed of every hot-head. And maybe the 200 years of peace since, also maybe has something to do with this.)

Modifié par Solica, 01 décembre 2009 - 08:52 .

[Banana Muffin]

thegreateski wrote...

Only nudity in this game was the Broodmother.

So true and so sad.

[addiction21]

F-C wrote...

-Area51-Silent wrote...

I am pretty sure movies like "The Hangover" were classified as R-rated meaning you had to be atleast 17 to go see the movie. That had plenty of nudity in it (not even with in the traditional sense). I am not advocating we put hardcore sex scenes in video games, but having tasteful scenes with limited nudity would classify the same amount of promiscuity as movies with less tasteful images/scenes.

So whats worst? Polygons/pixles or the real thing?

well if i doubt i would buy a movie called 'the hangover' for my niece for instance.

on the other hand if i was at the store and she presented me with a box game called "dragon age:origins" and i glanced at it, saw it was a role-playing game with swords and sorcery, and saw the mature label i would assume its because it has some blood and violence in it. i would probably think thats ok, because honestly you see violence in a movie like Shrek.

then when i walked in and saw some sex scene going on and her sitting there drooling over the screen and being like "omg omg omg" i might get a little freaked out about it.


you just have to take things in context, and thats how it really is, and thats why it gets so much attention.

 So a video game with blood all over the boxed labeled mature and you think its content is going to be similar to a childs movie rated PG?

[Darpaek]

No, you're not claiming superiority. Your passive-aggressive European snide sensibilities simply belies it in every dispersion cast on American society.



I, on the other hand, am claiming superiority - clearly, openly, and honestly.



You just don't understand - and you NEVER will. We built a society based upon everyone looking out for their own interests. America is built on the concept that when everyone seeks out their own liberty, we all become more free. Kinda like how free markets and capitalism work (not that Europeans would understand that, either...).



It's not zero-sum. It's not the "corporations" teaming up with the "government" to crush us all down. We established a government to arbitrate disputes between persons with conflicting liberties - not to articulate what those liberties can and can not be. Your European perspective cannot begin to even comprehend our society or the role the government we created plays in it.

[-Area51-Silent]

F-C



Maybe you should start reading then? it says ON THE BOX why exactly it is rated how it is. Ignorance is no excuse, and just glancing at the rating, not taking time to understand why its rated a certain way, especially since they spell out why it's rated a certain way.



Being blissfuly ignornant of whats given to you is no excuse for "omg omg i didnt know", its clear as day on the box. Not taking the time to understand that when its presented to you is on you, just like understanding what "R-Rated" refers to and what is and is not acceptable under that rating. What you gave is a prime example of being irresponsible.

[Banana Muffin]

F-C wrote...


and banana muffin my personal opinion is you are a rather low-class person to even bring abortion up as an option of why its ok for children to have sex. i have pretty much 0 respect for you after that comment, so dont expect much of a reply from me.

I didn't bring it up as an option as to why it's ok for children to have sex. I brought it up as an option if you accidently got pregnant.
For the record I don't think children should have sex. I think it's ok for teenagers that feels ready for it to have sex and I think they should protect themselves while doing it. If however for some reason they would get pregnant I think abortion is a pretty good option, though I respect if you don't wantto do it of course.