147 réponses à ce sujet

[o Ventus]

The only arguments I've seen regarding why a pedophile game would be impossible have been based on societal values.  I don't think that anyone here disagrees that such a creation is unlikely in today's society (though maybe I'm wrong).  The reasoning is valid, but I don't think it's particularly relevant if we're simply concerned with whether or not the subject matter could be translated into game form.  

I've seen rape simulators (played from the POV of the attacker) where some of the victims are children (almost universally girls), so...

 

I mean, they're Japanese (which explains it), but so....

[Andres Hendrix]

That's all about the delivery of the subject matter though, not the actual subject matter. They are two very different things, and two different mediums require a different delivery of the story.

 

You can argue that getting into the person's head is a more powerful delivery and I'd be inclined to agree with that, but you can still have the actual subject matter being covered without doing so.

 

The main point of mentioning another point of view was to kind of pull the idea away from it being "lolita: the video game" because I was never trying to say how you could re-create the exact novel in video game format, but rather just have a game be about the same subject matter. At the core, the subject matter is pedophilia.

 

It's like how you could create a novel that covers the same subjects as a Dragon Age game, but you wouldn't be able to include all the choices that we make in the game or the combat that we go through in the same way that it happens in the game.

In Lolita, Humbert is the subject matter. If people read the book, they would probably have a better understanding why such a thing would not be applicable to a video game.

[Andres Hendrix]

I've seen rape simulators (played from the POV of the attacker) where some of the victims are children (almost universally girls), so...

 

I mean, they're Japanese (which explains it), but so....

It's not surprising that you watched it.

[Masque]

So my obsession with Solas is healthy? That's reassuring. 

[o Ventus]

It's not surprising that you watched it.

I was wondering how long it would take for a personal comment to come up. I'm glad to see you've taken a break from your usual literary name dropping.

 

Though I am a bit shocked to see an apparent literary expert somehow misread text and come to a wildly different conclusion that what was presented in said text.

[Andres Hendrix]

I was wondering how long it would take for a personal comment to come up. I'm glad to see you've taken a break from your usual literary name dropping.

 

Though I am a bit shocked to see an apparent literary expert somehow misread text and come to a wildly different conclusion that what was presented in said text.

Wildely diffrent? You are the one who said "I've seen rape simulators (played from the POV of the attacker) where some of the victims are children (almost universally girls), so..." And  apprently you feel no shame about it.

[o Ventus]

Wildely diffrent? You are the one who said "I've seen rape simulators (played from the POV of the attacker) where some of the victims are children (almost universally girls), so..." And  apprently you feel no shame about it.

"I've seen them", which in terms of potential meaning could range from anything to "I've seen the boxart" to "I watch them in earnest".

 

If you're assumption was the latter and you wildly misread my words, which do you think it is?

[Andres Hendrix]

"I've seen them", which in terms of potential meaning could range from anything to "I've seen the boxart" to "I watch them in earnest".

 

If you're assumption was the latter and you wildly misread my words, which do you think it is?

"...played from the POV of the attacker) where some of the victims are children" Is a lot to 'glean' from just glancing at the "box art". What's it like feeling no shame?

[Cyonan]

In Lolita, Humbert is the subject matter.

 

It's still not a requirement that you get into the a person's head to cover them as a subject matter.

[Andres Hendrix]

It's still not a requirement that you get into the a person's head to cover them as a subject matter.

Then you are changing this from making a video game like Lolita, to just making another detective game. Which Lolita is not, it is not even a crime novel, it is an icky love story where Humbert's so called love destroys the life of a young girl. To make a game that is analogues with Lolita, it would have to meet requirement of the "Humbert's" perspective. Which is  arguably the most important part of the novel.

[Cyonan]

Then you are changing this from makeing a video game like Lolita, to just makeing another detective game. Which Lolita was not.

 

I'm not talking about a video game like Lolita and I never was. I've mentioned that multiple times now.

 

I'm talking about a video game that covers the same subject matter: A middle aged pedophile.

 

Otherwise I can start making absurd claims like a novel can never cover the same subject matter that a Dragon Age game does, and if you remove anything about interaction with dialogue or combat then I'll claim you changed the subject matter.

[Andres Hendrix]

I'm not talking about a video game like Lolita and I never was. I've mentioned that multiple times now.

 

I'm talking about a video game that covers the same subject matter: A middle aged pedophile.

 

Otherwise I can start making absurd claims like a novel can never cover the same subject matter that a Dragon Age game does, and if you remove anything about interaction with dialogue or combat then I'll claim you changed the subject matter.

To make a game that covers the same ethical thought experiment as a Novel like Lolita, it has to meet certain requirements. The major one being that it is in the perspective of the Humbert character (with all of his idiosyncrasies), if not, if it is something else, another detective game or what have you.  If you are not talking about a game "like" Lolita then you are talking about another sort of thought experimeant.

[Cyonan]

To make a game that covers the same ethical thought experiment as a Novel like Lolita, it has to meet certain requirements. The major one being that it is in the perspective of the Humbert character (with all of his idiosyncrasies), if not, if it is something else, another detective game or what have you.  If you are not talking about a game "like" Lolita then you are talking about another sort of thought experimeant.

 

You keep changing your conditions so much to things that I already said I wasn't arguing against that it suggests you don't even read half the content of my posts.

 

I said you could make a game to cover the same subject matter as Lolita, which as defined by you is a middle aged pedophile. I did not say that society would have no problems with it, I did not say that the delivery would be the same, and I did not say it would be the exact same thought experiment(you can have different thought experiments on the same subject matter). I said it would cover the same subject matter in its own way.

 

If you continue to ignore that or can't understand it, then I think I've said all that I can here without going in circles.

[Phoe77]

I've seen rape simulators (played from the POV of the attacker) where some of the victims are children (almost universally girls), so...

 

I mean, they're Japanese (which explains it), but so....

 

I unfortunately know that things like this exist.  I really just meant that I don't think they could enjoy any mainstream success in today's market in America.  I don't even know if something like that would be legal here.  But then again, Custer's Revenge was created and sold for the Atari not too terribly long ago, so what do I know really?

[Andres Hendrix]

I don't know, box art usually reveals a fair bit of information about the product.

 

You're assuming too much out of nothing merely to insult your way out of the hole you dug yourself in.

So you say. I don't examine such 'products'.

[Andres Hendrix]

You keep changing your conditions so much to things that I already said I wasn't arguing against that it suggests you don't even read half the content of my posts.

 

I said you could make a game to cover the same subject matter as Lolita, which as defined by you is a middle aged pedophile. I did not say that society would have no problems with it, I did not say that the delivery would be the same, and I did not say it would be the exact same thought experiment(you can have different thought experiments on the same subject matter). I said it would cover the same subject matter in its own way.

 

If you continue to ignore that or can't understand it, then I think I've said all that I can here without going in circles.

Changing my conditions? My conditions have been the same since my first post "I think for the last few gaming generations, video games have been taking over the ethical role that Novels used to fill. Novels have always been great for ethical thought experiments e.g. Nabokov's Lolita etc. My problem with this, is that video games do not have the same artistry nor do they cover the wide range of subjects that novels can."  If I made a mistake it was because I have about eight or more people responding to me on this, most of whom can do nothing but strawman what I've been  writing.

[o Ventus]

"...played from the POV of the attacker) where some of the victims are children" Is a lot to 'glean' from just glancing at the "box art". What's it like feeling no shame?

You can drop the accusations, unless you enjoy making an ass of yourself. Wikipedia has a LOT of information that you can gleam without actually having to partake in said activities, you know?

 

Or would you rather read about it in a pen-and-paper encyclopedia, O literary king?

 

Unless "knowing something exists" is the same thing as taking part in whatever the event is, you aren't "gleaning" anything except what you make up in your head. So again, unless you enjoy making an ass of yourself....

[GithCheater]

I reported this topic (and requested that it be locked) as it has been derailed since the 2nd post, and has devolved away from the benefits of video games (and how it relates to DAI) and has instead plunged into insults, pedophilia, and snobbery. 

[o Ventus]

I unfortunately know that things like this exist.  I really just meant that I don't think they could enjoy any mainstream success in today's market in America.  I don't even know if something like that would be legal here.  But then again, Custer's Revenge was created and sold for the Atari not too terribly long ago, so what do I know really?

http://cinemassacre..../22/atari-porn/

 

There were a lot more than just Custer's Revenge on the Atari. The video I linked is actually pretty entertaining and informative, but has NSFW language (and imagery, I guess, if poorly rendered pixel art 'nudity' can be considered explicit).

[Andres Hendrix]

You can drop the accusations, unless you enjoy making an ass of yourself. Wikipedia has a LOT of information that you can gleam without actually having to partake in said activities, you know?

 

Or would you rather read about it in a pen-and-paper encyclopedia, O literary king?

 

Unless "knowing something exists" is the same thing as taking part in whatever the event is, you aren't "gleaning" anything except what you make up in your head. So again, unless you enjoy making an ass of yourself....

You did not say 'read a Wikipedia article' you said that you have "seen" rape video games "...played from the POV of the attacker) where some of the victims are children." Also, you specifically mentioned "box art". What would bring you to such a thing in the first place hmmm? Are you a researcher for the FBI? lol

[Helmetto]

*Walks in, sees first post, expects thread to be about how fictional characters impact our lives/how we relate to them/etc*

 

*Sees dozens posts about how to make video games about depraved people and seriously complicated/controversial topics work*

 

What.

[BioWareMod03]

And we are done here.