233 réponses à ce sujet

[Eshme]

Shy young male gamers? Really, the players give many developers directions. It requires that they fill their wish that they dont tell. And this is the loudest audience imo. Worth of talk is at the calibre of cutting heads of ,or cheap hardcore porn. Trying to make a point is often driven into either extreme (do a test)

I thought there is many games, that developers have recognized a taste in style , and a richer audience. These are actually the better games.



And since the audience grows, it spawns different developers for it as well.

[JKoopman]

Because AMERICA, F*CK YEAH!

[Jassper]

TheOpposite wrote...

I don't even understand how there can be a debate on the issue. Why can't Bioware or any other developer put whatever content they want in their product? Why can't me and my wife make informed decisions about what we play and what we allow our children to play. Do opponents of "sex" really want to throw people in jail for creating a game with a sex scene in it? What is the argument?

Exactly, there are those that wish to live free and make these decisions for themselves, and there are those that feel they have the right to force their personal views on others.

As the great long haired hippie once said - "For he who is without sin shall cast the first stone"

A lot of people posting here really need to learn their history, some things stated are so uninformed I can only shake my head, but thats they way of things as actual history is not studied in schools anymore.

[kalniel]

Why is sex taboo when cutting a dudes head off is not?

  But sex isn't taboo...

Modifié par kalniel, 02 décembre 2009 - 05:09 .

[pathenry]

Any game company is free to put in whatever content they want (excluding a few things). Bioware could put scrolling porn footage at the top and bottom of the screen if they wanted to.

The esrb is a voluntary thing. Its not Big Brother. Its not the evil Puritans harshing anyones freedom of expression. The Constitution doesn't protect you from it. Its simply an advisory thing so parents that give two #@&s *can* make an informed decision without personally spending 100 hours playing every possible permutation of the game.

[Creature 1]

Bioware did the most profitable thing for them. They advertised the game as including partial nudity, then in the actual release made sure the characters kept their underwear on at all times. So they get the buyers who wanted sexual content, but made the actual content so tame that the censors couldn't slap an adults-only label on it. As a result, no one is happy!

[Tominokar]

Creature 1 wrote...
That is laughable.  People of non-European origin make up maybe 3-4% of the population of Europe, and racial diversity is extremely low in many European nations.  In the US 25% of people are from racial minorities, split approximately equally between black people and Hispanic people, plus some Asians and American Indians.  The cultural differences between the majority and the black and Hispanic minorities are much greater than the difference between two minor ethnic groups in Europe that have coexisted for centuries. 

What utter rubbish! The US has one de-facto language, English, which is spoken by 80% of the population. The next largest group is Spanish at 12%, and all the others are under 2%.  Let's compare this to Europe: 19% German, 13% French, 12% English, 11% Italian, 9% Spanish, 9% Polish, 6% Romania, 5% Dutch. And that's not even including Russia. All these languages create a clear cultural divide in people, as they are not mutually intelligable.

As for culture, white and african americans are both part of American culture! Black and white americans of the same class live in much the same way, any differences you are percieving (perhaps from the poverty stricken southeast?) are based on income, not culture.

Racial diversity is not an issue in this debate, cultural diversity is. What colour a populations skin is makes no difference to sensitivity to videogame content.

Creature 1 wrote...
Maybe it would help to realize that blacks in American experienced inequality approaching the level of that experienced by the Jews in Germany in World War 2 and dragged out over a few centuries.

So you're claiming millions of African Americans have been killed as a part of state-organised genocide? How can you possibly claim that discrimination of blacks in the US has ever been on the same level as the holocaust?

Does any other group in Europe have that kind of recent history?

By recent history I assume you mean since WW2, and I assume you mean racial discrimination on the same level as blacks since WW2. Well ongoing today we have the Roma, who are persecuted across Europe. In many Eastern European countries, ethnic persecution is ongoing, as evident by the Kosovo genocide in the 90's. In the Georgia, ethnic groups trying to gain independance are being violently repressed. And in Moscow today, there's been many articles on the dangers of being black, as there has been a wave of violent attacks. How is this relevant anyway?

Creature 1 wrote...

Again, with religion, in most of Europe Catholicism dominates, and Europeans are religiously insipid compared to Americans, with a greater percentage of people who just see church as a social group, or don't practice a religion at all.  It's not hard to not have religious conflicts when most people nominally possess the same religion and don't really think it's that important anyway. 

No more than protestantism dominates in America. There is far more diverse established protestant churches that have been separated hundreds of years, and of course the Russian, Greek and Oriental Orthodox Churches. The muslim population is also double that of the US, and you're right, atheists and agnostics form a far larger group, again making the overall population less polarised.

Creature 1 wrote...
Additionally, you can't say, "We're diverse, because the people in the next country over speak a different language."  You have to look within the country, down to the level of cities.  The presence of Quebec up north does not cause crime in New York City.  The demographics of New York City are the cause of the crime in New York City.

Oh, I agree. But you are the one who said, and I quote, "The US is not Europe, it is much more demographically diverse".

[Jolly Teaparty]

FUN FACT: OP is a preying mantis

[addiction21]

America has been blamed

Religion has been blamed

Well now all we need is someone to blame the ****s and we will hit the forum debate trifecta.

[valis123]

Because most think that if you play a violent or sexual game you're either gonna be a violent rapist or a murderer when you grow up, though here in Europe it's a bit better compared to America fortunetly

[Revik]

Creature 1 wrote...

Tominokar wrote...

Creature 1 wrote...

The US is not Europe, it is much more demographically diverse

This amused me. It's incredibly naive to suggest your own country that is only 200 years old is more diverse than 50 countries put together, some thousands of years old. France alone has 77 regional languages and dozens of native ethnic groups, let alone the 8% of its population from non-European cultures. The sects of the Christian Church are also much more numerous and evenly distributed in Europe, along with other non-Christian religions.

So you cannot possibly blame the prudishness of the American public on its 'diverse demography'. If anything, it's the complete opposite- the lack of cultural diversity that causes intolerance for anything out of the mainstream 'nudity and sex must stay hidden' attitude of the conservative Christian majority.

That is laughable.  People of non-European origin make up maybe 3-4% of the population of Europe, and racial diversity is extremely low in many European nations.  In the US 25% of people are from racial minorities, split approximately equally between black people and Hispanic people, plus some Asians and American Indians.  The cultural differences between the majority and the black and Hispanic minorities are much greater than the difference between two minor ethnic groups in Europe that have coexisted for centuries.  Maybe it would help to realize that blacks in American experienced inequality approaching the level of that experienced by the Jews in Germany in World War 2 and dragged out over a few centuries.  Does any other group in Europe have that kind of recent history? 

Again, with religion, in most of Europe Catholicism dominates, and Europeans are religiously insipid compared to Americans, with a greater percentage of people who just see church as a social group, or don't practice a religion at all.  It's not hard to not have religious conflicts when most people nominally possess the same religion and don't really think it's that important anyway. 

Additionally, you can't say, "We're diverse, because the people in the next country over speak a different language."  You have to look within the country, down to the level of cities.  The presence of Quebec up north does not cause crime in New York City.  The demographics of New York City are the cause of the crime in New York City. 

France is the country with the greatest racial diversity in Europe, and, unsurprisingly, also the country with the most problems with civil unrest.  France has a growing minority population, and their situation is more analogous to the situation in America because there are significant cultural differences between the majority and minority, as well as differences in affluence, education, and employment opportunities. 

Will France experience an increase in teen pregnancies and STD transmission along with the increase in demographic diversity, and thus move towards a more prudish approach towards sexuality?  Since the minority group immigrating into France is mostly Islamic, my *guess* is probably not unless the immigrants leave Islam over time, and then unless the problems of poverty and lack of job opportunities are solved France will probably see an increase in teen pregnancies in this minority. 

The rest of Europe had better pay attention to the situation in France, because increased immigration into all of Europe could lead to more social problems in other countries if poverty and education are not addressed. 

I am so glad you chimed in Creature 1.  What you say is true.  Other mostly homogenous nations don't have the same social issues as the US.  Europe's situation is just not comparable.  It was mentioned that the US is a relatively new country compared to other older nations but I would like to forward the idea that no other modern nation has been so open to immigration for as long as the US. 
Just to give you an idea of racial diversity I live in Los Angeles which may not be fair in comparison but just with 1 hours drive I can go to areas called Little Ethopia, Little Saigon, Little Tokyo, Chinatown, New China Town, Little Armenia, Korea Town, Santa Monica (lots of  gays and lesbians there from what I understand).  This is just off the top of my head as I am sure there are a multitude of others.  Can anyone else say the same? 

[Revik]

Sibelius1 wrote...

Tominokar wrote...

Creature 1 wrote...

The US is not Europe, it is much more demographically diverse

This amused me. It's incredibly naive to suggest your own country that is only 200 years old is more diverse than 50 countries put together, some thousands of years old. France alone has 77 regional languages and dozens of native ethnic groups, let alone the 8% of its population from non-European cultures. The sects of the Christian Church are also much more numerous and evenly distributed in Europe, along with other non-Christian religions.

So you cannot possibly blame the prudishness of the American public on its 'diverse demography'. If anything, it's the complete opposite- the lack of cultural diversity that causes intolerance for anything out of the mainstream 'nudity and sex must stay hidden' attitude of the conservative Christian majority.

Great post Tominokar, could not have put it better myself.

As has been said before, trying to hide the "evil" that is sex and minimise it's media exposure to it has the exact opposite effect to that which it is trying to achieve.

It makes sex more mysterious, and more tempting, because by and large human nature dictates that you want what you can't have.

Proper education and anonymous provision of contraception are the only things that will reduce teenage pregnancies, not removing sex from a game, or from any other media for that matter.
 
 

 

By this same rationale shouldn't violence and killing be more tempting in Germany since they have such strict anti-violence provisions, true?
I don't buy this argument.  While I do agree that outlawing something could become "tempting" but the whole idea of wanting something you can't have is completely bogus.  There are many MANY things that are outlawed or things you "can't have" but none of these things cause a mad rush or an illegal underground movement for them.  Nuclear weapons are outlawed I don't see people rushing out to buy illegal arms.
This context only works under the guise of human avarice, greed, and desire.  Sex falls into one of these categories whereas violence at least for most is not.
I agree that education on the subject is preferrable but don't come on your European high horse and say your way is bad our way is better.

[Dark83]

To say violent video games cause violence is stupid. Video games are a product, and are purchased by those who enjoy them. If nothing else, the fact is that non-violent video games are purchased by the non-violent, and the violent video games are purchased by both.

This is why the studies that link them fail - they never account for the biased sample.

[MartinJHolm]

Would everyone please STFU about the Europe vs. US stuff.

[interesting03]

MartinJHolm wrote...

Would everyone please STFU about the Europe vs. US stuff.

Atleast it hasn't degenerated into christianity vs atheism. They tend to get rather verbal, this debate has some how managed to remain civil.

Modifié par interesting03, 02 décembre 2009 - 06:04 .

[Dark83]

Revik wrote...

By this same rationale shouldn't violence and killing be more tempting in Germany since they have such strict anti-violence provisions, true?
I don't buy this argument.  While I do agree that outlawing something could become "tempting" but the whole idea of wanting something you can't have is completely bogus.  There are many MANY things that are outlawed or things you "can't have" but none of these things cause a mad rush or an illegal underground movement for them.  Nuclear weapons are outlawed I don't see people rushing out to buy illegal arms.
This context only works under the guise of human avarice, greed, and desire.  Sex falls into one of these categories whereas violence at least for most is not.
I agree that education on the subject is preferrable but don't come on your European high horse and say your way is bad our way is better.

No, you have this sideways.
What makes things tempting is what that thing is associated with.
Violence is associated with two things - bad, and glory. American culture is saturated with media glorifying violence. It is more "manly" to beat up the "bad guy" (ie. guy who doesn't agree with you). The culture that associates violence with "manliness" and glorifies it will be more violent than a culture that associates it with "uncivilized, ignorant barbarians". The former culture, you're "bad ass", the latter culture, you're "a violent hick".

Sex and drinking, if denied by age, become associated with "being an adult". Which is why there's more problems with underaged drinking (quantity and magnitude) in America - they strive for it because then they're "grown up" and "cool".

[Creature 1]

Tominokar wrote...

What utter rubbish! The US has one de-facto language, English, which is spoken by 80% of the population. The next largest group is Spanish at 12%, and all the others are under 2%.  Let's compare this to Europe: 19% German, 13% French, 12% English, 11% Italian, 9% Spanish, 9% Polish, 6% Romania, 5% Dutch. And that's not even including Russia. All these languages create a clear cultural divide in people, as they are not mutually intelligable.

As I said, look at the local level.  People speaking French in Quebec don't change the crime rate in New York City. 

As for culture, white and african americans are both part of American culture! Black and white americans of the same class live in much the same way, any differences you are percieving (perhaps from the poverty stricken southeast?) are based on income, not culture.

Can you define "American" culture?  There is no such thing.  The US does have a shared veneer in common, but if you go visit the Amish in Pennsylvania, or Chinatown in NYC, or inner-city LA, or the Mid-West, or Hawaii, or rural Appalachia, or New England, you'll find a different culture in each. 

Yes, money is a great part of it (in some ways the Obamas have more in common with upper-class Caucasians than inner-city blacks), but you'd have to be delusional to think that everyone in the US is completely race-blind.

Racial diversity is not an issue in this debate, cultural diversity is. What colour a populations skin is makes no difference to sensitivity to videogame content.

Did not say it did necessarily. 

So you're claiming millions of African Americans have been killed as a part of state-organised genocide? How can you possibly claim that discrimination of blacks in the US has ever been on the same level as the holocaust?

Not as a program of genocide, because at that time black people were seen as an economic resource.  Black people in the US were enslaved, raped, and murdered, and even after slavery was abolished faced another century of discrimination, being isolated from white society and suffering lynchings and otherwise terrorized.  The death toll of the slave trade is incalculable.  It's estimated that 8 million people died on slave ships crossing the Atlantic, but the number who died due to mistreatment while in slavery in the US cannot be known.  So, no, I said that the level of mistreatment of blacks in the US approached the level experienced by Jews in the Holocaust.  The death toll for the slave trade was greater than the Holocaust and the duration of persecution going back many generations, but the Holocaust in some ways was more severe because it was a concentrated effort at extermination rather than economic exploitation followed by casual persecution. 

How can you measure that severity of an atrocity?  The duration and total death toll of the slave trade was greater, but the intensity of persecution in the Holocaust was greater.  There's no point trying to decide which one was worse.  Both should have never happened. 

By recent history I assume you mean since WW2, and I assume you mean racial discrimination on the same level as blacks since WW2. Well ongoing today we have the Roma, who are persecuted across Europe. In many Eastern European countries, ethnic persecution is ongoing, as evident by the Kosovo genocide in the 90's. In the Georgia, ethnic groups trying to gain independance are being violently repressed. And in Moscow today, there's been many articles on the dangers of being black, as there has been a wave of violent attacks. How is this relevant anyway?

When I refer to Europe I am talking about nations not previously in the USSR, which possess a more stereotypically Western culture. 

You bring up a good example with the Roma.  The Roma have historically been victims of racism, and also suffer from poverty, and have higher crime rates, teen pregnancy rates, and abortion rates than the majority populations. 

Oh, I agree. But you are the one who said, and I quote, "The US is not Europe, it is much more demographically diverse".

I stand by that statement.  Europe is becoming more diverse, but it's a region that's primarily Caucasian, without the demographic differences that tend lead to higher crime rates and pregnancy rates--so far. 

And what this has to do with a video game, the question was, "Why do Americans react more strongly to depictions of sexuality in entertainment than depictions of violence?"  My answer is that demographic differences make issues of sexuality more problematic in the US than in most European nations. 

[red8x]

According to the ESRB ratings:


MATURE

Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be
suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category
may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or
strong language.


ADULTS ONLY

Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that
should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this
category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or
graphic sexual content and nudity.

Apparently there's a huge leap in being able to handle nudity in that one year between 17 and 18.  Who knew. Anyway, it seems that Bioware/EA just wanted to make a marketable game.  A game rated AO would more than likely have limited their audience.

As to why sex in video games is taboo but violence is not, no idea.  Maybe David Cronenberg should make a video game and we can see what happens to people when violence and nudity are combined.  It'll be a social experiment.

[Sylixe]

pathenry wrote...


Any game company is free to put in whatever content they want (excluding a few things). Bioware could put scrolling porn footage at the top and bottom of the screen if they wanted to.

The esrb is a voluntary thing. Its not Big Brother. Its not the evil Puritans harshing anyones freedom of expression. The Constitution doesn't protect you from it. Its simply an advisory thing so parents that give two #@&s *can* make an informed decision without personally spending 100 hours playing every possible permutation of the game.

Good luck ever getting that game into circulation or carried in store by anyone.  They exert more power and influence over things that you imagine.

interesting03 wrote...
Atleast it hasn't degenerated into christianity vs atheism. They tend to get rather verbal, this debate has some how managed to remain civil.

That's my favorite argument to observe.  Watching one group convince us to worship the invisible man and another group trying to get us to believe that the chair you are sitting on doesn't exist.  I usually go with http://en.wikipedia....aghetti_Monster for my "spiritual" needs.

Modifié par Sylixe, 02 décembre 2009 - 06:39 .

[BomimoDK]

Can you define "American" culture?  There is no such thing.  The US does have a shared veneer in common, but if you go visit the Amish in Pennsylvania, or Chinatown in NYC, or inner-city LA, or the Mid-West, or Hawaii, or rural Appalachia, or New England, you'll find a different culture in each. 

sorry, but that was a massive mouth dump you just delivered there. american culture is the common love of independence and freedom for the individual.
america's culture contains extreme amounts of individualims, often on the border of egoism. the health care program struck a nerve at egoists since that would mean  A/ it's gonna cost me 100$ extra a month and b/ do you, this is communism. (in fact it's just socialism and it does no harm, but anything benifiting the public that isn't thought out by an american is the product of something else, and since the concept is the greater good of all, all the egoists cry "COMMUNISM" and tell "**** NO!!!".
america says that they're about freedom for all. but they show us that this freedom only applies to middle/upper class and this freedom better **** off if it was to ever cost you some luxury.

american culture exists, and it leaves the whole world around it confused and dumbfound at how hypocritic it actually is.

[Zenon]

Creature 1 wrote...

That is laughable.  People of non-European origin make up maybe 3-4% of the population of Europe, and racial diversity is extremely low in many European nations.  In the US 25% of people are from racial minorities, split approximately equally between black people and Hispanic people, plus some Asians and American Indians.  The cultural differences between the majority and the black and Hispanic minorities are much greater than the difference between two minor ethnic groups in Europe that have coexisted for centuries.  Maybe it would help to realize that blacks in American experienced inequality approaching the level of that experienced by the Jews in Germany in World War 2 and dragged out over a few centuries.  Does any other group in Europe have that kind of recent history? 

That is also because Europe is already more diverse than the US by itself. Perhaps we have less Chinese people here, than in the US and definately less Mexicans. But there are enough people from other countries and cultures living in European countries to give us more than enough diversity.

And about the Jews: You Americans should be careful with accusations. What did you do to native Americans (called "Indians" by Columbus in error) in your own country? Stealing their land, doing many cruel brutal acts towards them, killing entire tribes, bringing them close to extinction like a genocide? The rest of them basically live like animals in a zoo called reservation! How many native Americans are anywhere successful in the US? Very, very few. Much less than former native Africans. Also interesting to note, that in the US seem to be more N*z*s than nowadays in Germany. You should stop your analogies right there! I resent what was done to the Jews in WW2, but using it in a discussion like this is abominable.

Again, with religion, in most of Europe Catholicism dominates, and Europeans are religiously insipid compared to Americans, with a greater percentage of people who just see church as a social group, or don't practice a religion at all.  It's not hard to not have religious conflicts when most people nominally possess the same religion and don't really think it's that important anyway. 

I prefer religious insipid to extremely charismatic or fundamentalist Christians or Muslims. George W. Bush was supposedly a strong believer and Christian. Hence he started a war with Iraq based on lies. How much of good christian is that? He violated quite a few of the ten commandments, didn't he? Where is the "love your neighbour"?

Additionally, you can't say, "We're diverse, because the people in the next country over speak a different language."  You have to look within the country, down to the level of cities.  The presence of Quebec up north does not cause crime in New York City.  The demographics of New York City are the cause of the crime in New York City. 

I'd say it's more the poverty of certain groups of the population living in a subculture of crime and lack of education. That more colored than white people seem to be struggling with these problems may have historical reasons, don't you think so, too?

France is the country with the greatest racial diversity in Europe, and, unsurprisingly, also the country with the most problems with civil unrest.  France has a growing minority population, and their situation is more analogous to the situation in America because there are significant cultural differences between the majority and minority, as well as differences in affluence, education, and employment opportunities. 

Well, in the United Kingdom are also many colored people, native Africans, Indians (more peaceful, I guess) to name just two major groups. I think your reasoning seems based on half-educated knowledge and judgement without really thinking deeply yourself.

Will France experience an increase in teen pregnancies and STD transmission along with the increase in demographic diversity, and thus move towards a more prudish approach towards sexuality?  Since the minority group immigrating into France is mostly Islamic, my *guess* is probably not unless the immigrants leave Islam over time, and then unless the problems of poverty and lack of job opportunities are solved France will probably see an increase in teen pregnancies in this minority. 

Maybe in the Islam cases of teenage pregnancies are better hidden? Oh I forgot to consider, that in some countries a girl having premarital sex is being brutally murdered by her own siblings to protect the family's honor. Well, probably that solves many social problems, doesn't it?

Modifié par Zenon, 02 décembre 2009 - 06:45 .

[OBoile]

The USA is a melting pot. Not sure how people can consider it as diverse as Europe.

[lv12medic]

red8x wrote...

A game rated AO would more than likely have limited their audience.

It would also severely cripple their ability to distribute the title.  I'm pretty sure most retailers in the US, especially the big ones (Wally mart and such) will not distribute an AO game under any circumstances.

I think during the whole "Hot Coffee" nonsense that as soon as the ESRB changed their rating of GTA (number whatever... I forget) to AO it was immediately pulled off of store shelves until Rock Star re-distributed the game as M-rated compliant game.  So getting an AO rating is like getting a death sentence economically.

[pathenry]

Sylixe wrote...
Good luck ever getting that game into circulation or carried in store by anyone.  They exert more power and influence over things that you imagine.

True, but my copy of the Constitution doesn't say a private company like Wal-mart has to stock my porno game. It doesn't say that a company has to censor itself just so it can get shelf-space near the toy department.

Our freedom of speech/expression doesn't come with a guarentee of zero negative ramifactions from private companies or individuals.

With the Internet and digital downloads, this point is moot anyway. If someone offers a product that people want, they will get it.

[Creature 1]

Zenon wrote...
[b]And about the Jews: You Americans should be careful with accusations. What did you do to native Americans (called "Indians" by Columbus in error) in your own country? Stealing their land, doing many cruel brutal acts towards them, killing entire tribes, bringing them close to extinction like a genocide? The rest of them basically live like animals in a zoo called reservation! How many native Americans are anywhere successful in the US? Very, very few. Much less than former native Africans. Also interesting to note, that in the US seem to be more N*z*s than nowadays in Germany. You should stop your analogies right there! I resent what was done to the Jews in WW2, but using it in a discussion like this is abominable.

I see reading comprehension is not your forte.  

I prefer religious insipid to extremely charismatic or fundamentalist Christians or Muslims. George W. Bush was supposedly a strong believer and Christian. Hence he started a war with Iraq based on lies. How much of good christian is that? He violated quite a few of the ten commandments, didn't he? Where is the "love your neighbour"?

See above. 

I'd say it's more the poverty of certain groups of the population living in a subculture of crime and lack of education. That more colored than white people seem to be struggling with these problems may have historical reasons, don't you think so, too?

Yes, as I have said repeatedly, there are immensely significant historical reasons for the US's current demographics. 

Well, in the United Kingdom are also many colored people, native Africans, Indians (more peaceful, I guess) to name just two major groups. I think your reasoning seems based on half-educated knowledge and judgement without really thinking deeply yourself.

The black population in the UK is maybe 2% of the general population.  That's a much lower level of diversity than in America.  Additionally, black people in the UK do not have the same history as black people in the US.  

Maybe in the Islam cases of teenage pregnancies are better hidden? Oh I forgot to consider, that in some countries a girl having premarital sex is being brutally murdered by her own siblings to protect the family's honor. Well, probably that solves many social problems, doesn't it?

Again, reading comprehension.  Honor killings are a societal problem, not a solution.