Jimquisition: Rape vs. Murder

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 NEXT
 

macfluffers:

In that same vein, yeah, everyone dies, but not everyone gets eviscerated and bleeds out over the course of a half-hour. Some of the deaths that occur in video games are pretty damn horrific. Had the violence been real, some cases would be significantly more traumatic than rape, both physiologically and psychologically, if the victim survives. Of course, that brings up the obvious fact that nobody survives death, but for that reason I think that comparing rape to torture and extreme battery may be more appropriate, which aren't as poorly received as rape.

Yeah, that's kind of a hole in Jim's argument as it trivialises death more that normal sane people actually would.

See, if a baby dies from leukaemia, it is absolutely no comfort AT ALL that the baby was doomed to eventually die anyway. Because they were supposed to die almost a century later after leading a full, happy and constructive life and dying peacefully in old age once frankly fed up with being old and the realisation that with finite resources that their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren need a place on this planet. Not die in their first few years of life.

No one ever gave the serial killer Harold Shipman a free pass because he mainly poisoned older people and pensioners, even though they were going to die. Life is precious, even in old age just because life may not be prolonged doesn't mean it is somehow better to hasten it.

No. Killing people is still really really bad. Anyone. It's a tragedy when people die in war, as remembrance services for the war dead make clear.

I think there is another more "mechanical" reason that rape is not in video games:

Look the most basic video game, Asteroids. You have polygons and you shoot pixels at other polygons. The Shapes are of course spaceship and the pixels are rockets, this is violence and it makes for a compelling and challenging game of shooting at people in form a competition. From Doom through to Quake to Call of Duty and Team Fortress 2, you set the precedent of shooting pixels at people and them shooting pixels at you in part of the competitive nature.

Rape is essentially hugely mismatched wrestling. Mismatched from the start destroys any competitive element and video games have never been good wrestling simulators. Far better at jumping and shooting simulators, direct polygon interaction falls apart. Replay isn't really a "game" as far as I can tell, it's a choose your own adventure story with live 3D animation. It's just ridiculous to have a scenario of two sides mutually trying to rape each other as if they both wanted to have sex with each other... then they would.

medv4380:
When I think of serial killers I think of Jack the Ripper and the BTK killer. If you ever read the police reports of what they did its horrific, and to play as a character doing those things would be deeply disturbing to me. If someone ever did that kind of a game I think they would make it more like an assassination game, and just skip what they actually did do. A game where I'm hunting a serial killer I think I could enjoy, or a game where I play as a victim in a survival horror fashion could be interesting a la the Zodiac Killer.

Playing as a killer-hunter or a would-be victim would be interesting, but I really do mean playing as a sadist or psychopath.

Imagine a stealth game in which the player is a slasher film villain sneakily picking off teenage campers. I don't know about anyone else, but that sounds like fun to me, and I swear that I'm not homicidal.

Even without the serial killer aspect, a game about murder would still be interesting to me. A game about the mafia for example--destroying businesses who don't pay their protection money, human trafficking, threatening the families of rivals, and murdering prosecutors and judges. Such a game would be "edgy", but would it receive the same negative response that rape games do?

Treblaine:
Look the most basic video game, Asteroids. You have polygons and you shoot pixels at other polygons. The Shapes are of course spaceship and the pixels are rockets, this is violence and it makes for a compelling and challenging game of shooting at people in form a competition. From Doom through to Quake to Call of Duty and Team Fortress 2, you set the precedent of shooting pixels at people and them shooting pixels at you in part of the competitive nature.

Rape is essentially hugely mismatched wrestling. Mismatched from the start destroys any competitive element and video games have never been good wrestling simulators. Far better at jumping and shooting simulators, direct polygon interaction falls apart. Replay isn't really a "game" as far as I can tell, it's a choose your own adventure story with live 3D animation. It's just ridiculous to have a scenario of two sides mutually trying to rape each other as if they both wanted to have sex with each other... then they would.

This is a good analysis of the situation. I guess the ultimate reason rape in media is received so poorly is that killing in games tend to be a sort of competition, while from the start, rape can only have one "winner" and "loser", if you'll pardon the terms.

That said, I like to think about Monster Girl Quest in this context, as well as other games were rape is the "penalty" for losing fights. Obviously, it's not really a penalty for the player (especially for MCG because the protagonist is a guy), but in these games, rapes can be prevented by winning fights, a more normal brand of violence. I don't know if I'm bringing up these examples for or against the depiction of rape in games, but it comes to mind.

Schadrach:

It depends, in many jurisdictions rape isn't something a woman can do without an instrument (because rape requires one to penetrate), and a woman forcing a man into sexual activity through force, the threat of force, or while unconscious, intoxicated, or otherwise unable to consent isn't counted as rape (it isn't by the FBI/CDC statistics, for example; with the CDC using "made to penetrate" to cover that case).

Then in my opinion this kind of jurisdiction is incredibly stupid.
Rape is forcing someone to sex, if the victim is the one penetrating, or the one being penetrated is not important.
It works this way in my country (Germany) and i think that's the way it should work.
It seems really really offinsive towards male rape victims to say "Well, technically you haven't been raped."

Amazingly eloquent and almost absurdly observant. This articulates pretty much the intangible wrongness of rape in the 'is it worse than killing in pop culture' debate.

After thinking about this a bit more I just wanted to chip in another two pence.
Looking at the comments I couldn't help noticing a lot of people using words like 'monster' and 'evil', this is a mode of thinking that is incredibly dangers not just for rape issues but for any kind of behaviour detrimental to others.
I think we can all agree that monsters don't exist and I for one don't believe in either good nor evil, there are just people, sometimes they will do constructive things and sometimes they will do destructive things. The collective thinking that individuals where monsters or evil is what led us down the dark road of the witch hunts, it's what leads certain demographics to view others as unclean or inferior, or even some kind of threat.

I'm in no way suggesting that the actions of certain individuals (lets call them wankers) are in some way not as bad as they've been made out, but calling someone a monster dehumanises them and makes it less and less clear that if we slip up we could be just like them.

I hear this kind of thinking allot when people discus the media, the way that it 'manipulates the masses, but I'm aware of it so there is no chance of me ever being manipulated by it'.
The idea that some people just aren't right in the head and that's why they do these thing and I don't.
I'm rambling so I'll just say that we can all 'fall from grace' but that dosen't make use monsters, it means that the bullied hasn't realised when they have become the bully.

[Edit]: I just wanted to add that for those of you who are just insulting '5ilver', he wins by default because you have resorted to insults.
It dosen't sound like he is trying to be offensive, it sounds like he is making a point (if a little clumsy) about the double standard that if one negative thing isn't allowed then all should be regardless of severity.
Seriously guys, just shouting someone down because they don't agree with you is't helpful.

It's much easier to make killing unserious or even slapstick than it is a form of torture.

DiMono:

Aardvaarkman:
[. . .] it's rather strange that you define rape as "forcing other adults to engage in sexual intercourse" - there's nothing about rape that requires the victim to "engage in sexual intercourse" - it's physical violence that is forced upon them - not something that requires engagement in anything sexual.

Actually, yes, rape is all about sexual intercourse. Rape is the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse. Forced sex is the tool by which the rapist asserts their dominance, which allows them to get off on imposing their will upon the victim. By definition, if there's no sex involved, it's not rape.

his problem is in the "engage in" part, not the sexual intercourse.

Also, Treblaine.See, here's the thing man.

Treblaine:

I said this DISCUSSION was CONCERNING rape between adults, not the issue of whether an 18 year old having sex with a 17 year old is rape or not.

The discussion was concerning rape, period. Also, there are three people you rape in rapelay, one is 10 to my knowledge. Also, statuatory rape is totally irrelevent here.

And this is the biggest, stupidest miss-wording I have ever seen

By rape, it's clear Jim (and I) were talking about adults forcing other adults to engage in sexual intercourse. There is no grey area between that rape and sex.

The word adult only exists as a way to exclude children and was entirely irrelevant unless you're saying that the rape of a child doesn't count (whether it's by an adult or another child, a 17 year old raping an 18 year old would also be excluded but yea). The "forcing" part already excludes statutory rape, the "forcing " part removes all grey area. No, he's talking about people forcing other people to have sex, the "adult" part just excludes a whole bunch of instances and I have no reason to think Jim was excluding them

Treblaine:
But do you actually "murder" in video games?

Is rape worse than killing your opponent in combat? Murder is UNJUSTIFIED killing.

Have you played Fable, Hitman, Fallout 3, The Elder Scrolls or Prototype? Those games definitely involve murder in them.

On the note completely unrelated to the whole which is worse discussion (I think debating something like this is stupid by the way):
Anyone knows what the game at around 3:20 is, also is it available on PC (suppose not, but asking can't hurt) ??

P.S. I just got an idea for a no right answer episode. (it's a joke by the way)

Vegan_Doodler:
The collective thinking that individuals where monsters or evil is what led us down the dark road of the witch hunts, it's what leads certain demographics to view others as unclean or inferior, or even some kind of threat.

No, what lead us to things like witch hunts are stereotypes used to oppress entire groups of people, not individuals and certainly not individuals who committed a crime.

Vegan_Doodler:
I'm in no way suggesting that the actions of certain individuals (lets call them wankers) are in some way not as bad as they've been made out, but calling someone a monster dehumanises them and makes it less and less clear that if we slip up we could be just like them.

Wankers? "Oh, you raped and killed that girl? Gosh John, you're such a bloody wanker." Are you serious? You slip up and kill someone by mistake, you slip up and support a dictator or a demagogue, you don't slip up and rape someone. You have to be inhuman scum already to get to that point.

[Edit]: I just wanted to add that for those of you who are just insulting '5ilver', he wins by default because you have resorted to insults.
It dosen't sound like he is trying to be offensive, it sounds like he is making a point (if a little clumsy) about the double standard that if one negative thing isn't allowed then all should be regardless of severity.

Which is a completely moronic point to begin with. There is a reason we don't have the death penalty for parking violations. Comparing rape to a paper cut isn't a little clumsy, it's offensively retarded and he deserves to be shot down for that. He already lost, mainly the genetic lottery.

Metalrocks:

this reminds of the book by michael crichton. he wrote a story about a woman molesting a man she was crazy about. even when the man refused her, she still sexually harassed him.
if i remember correctly, it was based on a true story.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disclosure_%28novel%29

You remember incorrectly. A primary portion of this novel uses a VR-style database which is in development. Disclosure is more about the tech industry than science fiction, sure, but it's not based on anything true.

Not to say that he doesn't do research for his novels, which he does.

Anaphyis:

Vegan_Doodler:
The collective thinking that individuals where monsters or evil is what led us down the dark road of the witch hunts, it's what leads certain demographics to view others as unclean or inferior, or even some kind of threat.

No, what lead us to things like witch hunts are stereotypes used to oppress entire groups of people, not individuals and certainly not individuals who committed a crime.

People accused of being witches weren't part of a particular demographic (besides female of-course).

Vegan_Doodler:
I'm in no way suggesting that the actions of certain individuals (lets call them wankers) are in some way not as bad as they've been made out, but calling someone a monster dehumanises them and makes it less and less clear that if we slip up we could be just like them.

Wankers? "Oh, you raped and killed that girl? Gosh John, you're such a bloody wanker." Are you serious? You slip up and kill someone by mistake, you slip up and support a dictator or a demagogue, you don't slip up and rape someone. You have to be inhuman scum already to get to that point.[/quote]
I use the term wanker to describe all the scum of the earth, like I said I am not trying to trivialise its just how I speak.

[Edit]: I just wanted to add that for those of you who are just insulting '5ilver', he wins by default because you have resorted to insults.
It dosen't sound like he is trying to be offensive, it sounds like he is making a point (if a little clumsy) about the double standard that if one negative thing isn't allowed then all should be regardless of severity.

Which is a completely moronic point to begin with. There is a reason we don't have the death penalty for parking violations. Comparing rape to a paper cut isn't a little clumsy, it's offensively retarded and he deserves to be shot down for that. He already lost, mainly the genetic lottery.[/quote]
Well I don't think it's moronic and that it's something that should be taken into consideration more when thinking about the artistic future of games as whole.

Side note: this thread has been expectationally level headed considering the sensitive subject matter so I am not going to derail it or degrade it with a shouting match. If you want to have a discussion I'm up for that but I'm not going to respond to hostility.

mike1921:

DiMono:

Aardvaarkman:
[. . .] it's rather strange that you define rape as "forcing other adults to engage in sexual intercourse" - there's nothing about rape that requires the victim to "engage in sexual intercourse" - it's physical violence that is forced upon them - not something that requires engagement in anything sexual.

Actually, yes, rape is all about sexual intercourse. Rape is the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse. Forced sex is the tool by which the rapist asserts their dominance, which allows them to get off on imposing their will upon the victim. By definition, if there's no sex involved, it's not rape.

his problem is in the "engage in" part, not the sexual intercourse.

See, I don't think that's the case. Because he specifically said "it's physical violence that is forced upon them - not something that requires engagement in anything sexual." If you were correct, then the point he would have argued would have been force vs "engage in", but instead he argued sex vs. not sex.

One of the most interesting and sensible attempts to address the issue I've ever seen.

macfluffers:

Even without the serial killer aspect, a game about murder would still be interesting to me. A game about the mafia for example--destroying businesses who don't pay their protection money, human trafficking, threatening the families of rivals, and murdering prosecutors and judges. Such a game would be "edgy", but would it receive the same negative response that rape games do?

Hitman series has ALWAYS been a de-facto "murder simulator" even though obsensibly you are an "assassin" which is somehow more noble/cool a role. And you aren't killing innocent teenagers so much as drug dealers, crime lords and even pedophile politicians! Hitman series has always in rather hackneyed ways made the targets remarkably unlike-able or somehow deserving of killing them. Also the game hugely discourages killing ANYONE except the targets, which is weird because then the game suddenly turns from "Murder simulator" to an extremely non-violent game as you try every trick in the book to get the armed guards and police out of the way without harming them.

Treblaine:
Look the most basic video game, Asteroids. You have polygons and you shoot pixels at other polygons. The Shapes are of course spaceship and the pixels are rockets, this is violence and it makes for a compelling and challenging game of shooting at people in form a competition. From Doom through to Quake to Call of Duty and Team Fortress 2, you set the precedent of shooting pixels at people and them shooting pixels at you in part of the competitive nature.

Rape is essentially hugely mismatched wrestling. Mismatched from the start destroys any competitive element and video games have never been good wrestling simulators. Far better at jumping and shooting simulators, direct polygon interaction falls apart. Replay isn't really a "game" as far as I can tell, it's a choose your own adventure story with live 3D animation. It's just ridiculous to have a scenario of two sides mutually trying to rape each other as if they both wanted to have sex with each other... then they would.

This is a good analysis of the situation. I guess the ultimate reason rape in media is received so poorly is that killing in games tend to be a sort of competition, while from the start, rape can only have one "winner" and "loser", if you'll pardon the terms.

That said, I like to think about Monster Girl Quest in this context, as well as other games were rape is the "penalty" for losing fights. Obviously, it's not really a penalty for the player (especially for MCG because the protagonist is a guy), but in these games, rapes can be prevented by winning fights, a more normal brand of violence. I don't know if I'm bringing up these examples for or against the depiction of rape in games, but it comes to mind.

Yeah, Monster Girl Quest doesn't have actual rape, he's only ever putting up mock resistance or dismay. It's the "bodice ripper" type scenario only with a submissive man instead.

But you're right, Rape could exist not in a player-vs-player scenario as if they both want to screw each other then they just would. But in an asymmetrical "survival scenario" such as a 'Deliverance' type scenario or rape being a motivation for the villains to hunt the protagonist and rape being of course the motivator to overcome them. Could work. Seems to be hinted at in the new Tomb Raider game though we should wait and see on that one.

The reason such a subject has not been seen in video games so much so far could be many fold:
-Protagonists in video games have usually been men, and I don't think the typical male gamer quite is mature enough to face the prospect of male rape... until perhaps recently. Though film has been able to tackle this maturely since the 1970's with Deliverance and that wasn't a one off, it is also addressed in Pulp Fiction and American History X.
(The closest this ever got in any game was Uncharted 2 where two male characters joke in subtle ways about what'll happen to them if thrown in a Turkish Prison)
-Video games for most of their existence have suffered from the wider media's impression that they have to be child suitable, so NO sexual violence ever. Only recently with many public battles like "Mass Effect Sideboob sex scene" has it finally been begrudgingly accepted by the media that games, like film, have adult themes for adult audiences.

But I think most importantly:
-I don't think players want to have to deal with their character suffering such a loss as to be sexually brutalised and humiliated like being raped. People can deal with dying and having to load from a save. But I don't think they can deal with something like... that.

For example are Mass Effect players ready to accept a scenario where Shepard might be captured and raped by perverts? That depends on what kind of attitude you take to the game, if most players approach the series as just a fun space adventure where they think their character can get through without any real suffering beyond some scars and bullet wounds, then that would UTTERLY shatter it. I don't think Mass Effect players are ready for even the threat of that happening, and how many of their beloved crew-members would they sacrifice to avoid their own character suffering that fate? Would they boycott the game demanding they change it? That, I don't know.

The closest equivalent scene in any game I can think of is the torture scene in Metal Gear Solid 3. It was awful, I had to watch Snake - the character I played - being slowly broken apart in front of me and be permanently damaged.

But it left in no doubt at all what kind of evil bastard Volgin was, and it emphasised all that snake (aka Big Boss) had lost to compelte his mission.

macfluffers:

medv4380:
When I think of serial killers I think of Jack the Ripper and the BTK killer. If you ever read the police reports of what they did its horrific, and to play as a character doing those things would be deeply disturbing to me. If someone ever did that kind of a game I think they would make it more like an assassination game, and just skip what they actually did do. A game where I'm hunting a serial killer I think I could enjoy, or a game where I play as a victim in a survival horror fashion could be interesting a la the Zodiac Killer.

Playing as a killer-hunter or a would-be victim would be interesting, but I really do mean playing as a sadist or psychopath.

Imagine a stealth game in which the player is a slasher film villain sneakily picking off teenage campers. I don't know about anyone else, but that sounds like fun to me, and I swear that I'm not homicidal.

Even without the serial killer aspect, a game about murder would still be interesting to me. A game about the mafia for example--destroying businesses who don't pay their protection money, human trafficking, threatening the families of rivals, and murdering prosecutors and judges. Such a game would be "edgy", but would it receive the same negative response that rape games do?

Various GTA games let you do those stuff, not all of it I think, (haven't played all of them) but some of them. Vice City has you harassing jurors so they'll vote innocent, and Vice City Stories lets you run a protection racket and smash up shops that don't pay. GtA IV had tons of crime family rivalries, and I doubt they were the only one.

I don't think I need to tell you how those games were received by the mainstream. The only reason they don't stir up shit anymore is because even for the media it'd be beating a dead horse.

Anaphyis:

Vegan_Doodler:
The collective thinking that individuals where monsters or evil is what led us down the dark road of the witch hunts, it's what leads certain demographics to view others as unclean or inferior, or even some kind of threat.

No, what lead us to things like witch hunts are stereotypes used to oppress entire groups of people, not individuals and certainly not individuals who committed a crime.

The actual witch hunts in Salem were very much used to oppress individuals. There was no group being targeted, it was "I think this person is a witch, get them'.

The only difference is now we replace witch with something that actually exists.

Anaphyis:

Wankers? "Oh, you raped and killed that girl? Gosh John, you're such a bloody wanker." Are you serious? You slip up and kill someone by mistake, you slip up and support a dictator or a demagogue, you don't slip up and rape someone. You have to be inhuman scum already to get to that point.

What if you thought they were giving consent but they weren't? And if we're counting statutory, what if they lie about their age and have a fake ID?

This video "Is just a shot away".

and Thank God for Jim. Great video.

Because In most games the killings are often justified (even if its only within the logic of the game) rape however can't possibly be justified.
Rape is someone losing control over themselves as they lust after their victim. Its a personal thing for the attacker that can't be justified by society.
Its also a perversion of one of the most natural and beautiful things that two people can do.
Murder is forced death, because death is the natural evolution of life, it is easier to deal with.
Rape is forced sex, its a twisted form of what should be one of the greatest/most important moments in two people's lives.

medv4380:
You covered the topic very well. I was hesitant to even watch given the title.

In terms of Rape in Games I think it boils down to context. I think the titles that where mentioned that the player participated in the Rape should only have AO ratings, and should be rejected by the community as they have been.

AO should be reserved for porn, you can have rape in a game or a movie and have it not be porn.

Nurb:
snip

Like I said, I can't speak for everyone. But I certainly don't play GTA or anything like that for the setting.

Just make the rape game about Hermaprodites so there wont be any distintions about men and woman. Alternatively, make a the game about Lovecraftian Horrors raping each other, it will be so fucked up that there wont be anyone mentally sane to complain how many tentacles can enter in the..........thing throat?

Father Time:

medv4380:
You covered the topic very well. I was hesitant to even watch given the title.

In terms of Rape in Games I think it boils down to context. I think the titles that where mentioned that the player participated in the Rape should only have AO ratings, and should be rejected by the community as they have been.

AO should be reserved for porn, you can have rape in a game or a movie and have it not be porn.

No AO is intended to be the Movie equivalent of NC-17 which because it's normally a death sentence for a movie results in it being cut down to an R rating, and as the MPAA states

An NC-17 rated motion picture is one that, in the view of the Rating Board, most parents would consider patently too adult for their children 17 and under. No children will be admitted. NC-17 does not mean "obscene" or "pornographic" in the common or legal meaning of those words, and should not be construed as a negative judgment in any sense. The rating simply signals that the content is appropriate only for an adult audience. An NC-17 rating can be based on violence, sex, aberrational behavior, drug abuse or any other element that most parents would consider too strong and therefore off-limits for viewing by their children

M is the equivalent of an R rating and means that if an adult thinks your mature enough for it they can let you watch.

Porn is basically Triple X which isn't even a valid MPAA rating.

Due to my workload I don't get around to playing that many games anymore, but to toss just one example in here about actual murder: Just Cause 2.

In Just Cause 2 I have fairly often run over, shot or otherwise killed innocent civilians. Rico's response? Making a quip about it ("crazy damn pedestrians!" while flooring a sports car across a crowded sidewalk is a memorable one).

Even when it concerns enemy combatants, the game encourages not just removing them as obstacles, but killing them in fun and interesting ways. Because it amuses you.

Just stop and think about that for a second.

And in this game, these actions aren't penalized, no one ever mentions me being a bit too trigger happy or that time I crashed a passenger jet (presumably loaded with civilians since I snagged it in take-off) into an oil-rig. If anything, that's your objective: cause as much chaos as possible and make this island hell on earth where anyone could at any time be killed by gangs, the military or the mad god of death and destruction that is Rico Rodriguez.

Now, do I have a problem with this? Nah. It's a great big fun game that doesn't take itself too seriously, and I'm quite capable of separating the game's fiction from reality.

But when you get right down to it, as a concept, it is downright sick if you tried to seriously draw a parallel to the real world from that game. There's no denying that this game trivializes, even glorifies casual murder. That's not too problematic under the assumption that the player can clearly distinguish fiction and reality. If anything, I'd be more worried if we only had games with "justified" killing. It would create an atmosphere of "killing is ALWAYS justified because that's all I ever play". I think it's probably not a bad thing to have the occasional completely over the top, crossing the line sort of Rico Rodriguez type to remind us that it IS fiction we're playing.

Now, personally I think adults should be trusted to not turn into psychotic murderers from playing games like this, so I don't mind them existing and even enjoy them myself on occasion (I like black humor for one). But if you ascribe at all to the notion that trivializing serious crimes is a bad thing and they should never happen as something the player can do and revel in, then either you are calling for games like this to be right out as well, or you're being hypocritical, or you haven't thought your argument all the way through.

medv4380:

Father Time:

medv4380:
You covered the topic very well. I was hesitant to even watch given the title.

In terms of Rape in Games I think it boils down to context. I think the titles that where mentioned that the player participated in the Rape should only have AO ratings, and should be rejected by the community as they have been.

AO should be reserved for porn, you can have rape in a game or a movie and have it not be porn.

No AO is intended to be the Movie equivalent of NC-17 which because it's normally a death sentence for a movie results in it being cut down to an R rating, and as the MPAA states

An NC-17 rated motion picture is one that, in the view of the Rating Board, most parents would consider patently too adult for their children 17 and under. No children will be admitted. NC-17 does not mean "obscene" or "pornographic" in the common or legal meaning of those words, and should not be construed as a negative judgment in any sense. The rating simply signals that the content is appropriate only for an adult audience. An NC-17 rating can be based on violence, sex, aberrational behavior, drug abuse or any other element that most parents would consider too strong and therefore off-limits for viewing by their children

M is the equivalent of an R rating and means that if an adult thinks your mature enough for it they can let you watch.

You should be quoting the ESRB not the MPAA. But there are movies with rapists in them that don't get NC-17 rating.

Father Time:

medv4380:

Father Time:

AO should be reserved for porn, you can have rape in a game or a movie and have it not be porn.

No AO is intended to be the Movie equivalent of NC-17 which because it's normally a death sentence for a movie results in it being cut down to an R rating, and as the MPAA states

An NC-17 rated motion picture is one that, in the view of the Rating Board, most parents would consider patently too adult for their children 17 and under. No children will be admitted. NC-17 does not mean "obscene" or "pornographic" in the common or legal meaning of those words, and should not be construed as a negative judgment in any sense. The rating simply signals that the content is appropriate only for an adult audience. An NC-17 rating can be based on violence, sex, aberrational behavior, drug abuse or any other element that most parents would consider too strong and therefore off-limits for viewing by their children

M is the equivalent of an R rating and means that if an adult thinks your mature enough for it they can let you watch.

You should be quoting the ESRB not the MPAA. But there are movies with rapists in them that don't get NC-17 rating.

How about Manhunt 2 having an AO rating. Rape is Strong Sexual Content therefore it should be an AO rating.

and to rub some salt in your wounds

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.

If you cant see how you edit a rape scene so you actually don't show what's going on there really is no helping you.

mike1921:

DiMono:

Aardvaarkman:
[. . .] it's rather strange that you define rape as "forcing other adults to engage in sexual intercourse" - there's nothing about rape that requires the victim to "engage in sexual intercourse" - it's physical violence that is forced upon them - not something that requires engagement in anything sexual.

Actually, yes, rape is all about sexual intercourse. Rape is the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse. Forced sex is the tool by which the rapist asserts their dominance, which allows them to get off on imposing their will upon the victim. By definition, if there's no sex involved, it's not rape.

his problem is in the "engage in" part, not the sexual intercourse.

Also, Treblaine.See, here's the thing man.

Treblaine:

I said this DISCUSSION was CONCERNING rape between adults, not the issue of whether an 18 year old having sex with a 17 year old is rape or not.

The discussion was concerning rape, period. Also, there are three people you rape in rapelay, one is 10 to my knowledge. Also, statuatory rape is totally irrelevent here.

And this is the biggest, stupidest miss-wording I have ever seen

By rape, it's clear Jim (and I) were talking about adults forcing other adults to engage in sexual intercourse. There is no grey area between that rape and sex.

The word adult only exists as a way to exclude children and was entirely irrelevant unless you're saying that the rape of a child doesn't count (whether it's by an adult or another child, a 17 year old raping an 18 year old would also be excluded but yea). The "forcing" part already excludes statutory rape, the "forcing " part removes all grey area. No, he's talking about people forcing other people to have sex, the "adult" part just excludes a whole bunch of instances and I have no reason to think Jim was excluding them

Sorry, Rapelay is banned from sale in my country so I have never played it, all I know is it is about the players forcibly raping women, I didn't know one of the victims was only... jesus, you're saying she is only 10 years old. But from all I can glean short of playing the game, the game is not a case of a man grooming a little girl to persuade and manipulate her to do something sexual, not like that book/film Lolita. It's unambiguously rape, forcing sex on them, and a whole lot WORSE than something already very wrong as the victim is so very young.

That was my point, that the discussion of grooming/manipulating children into sex is not the issue and how that is different if the girl is 10 years old or 17 years old (and also how close in age the other person in the relationship is). The issue is about using violence to force sex onto ANYONE in video games.

He brought up the very off topic issue of statutory rape purely on a matter pedantic semantic quibbling on how the term "statutory rape" somehow makes "rape" a grey area. When it so obviously does NOT.

No. Statutory rape *CAN* be a grey area for older teenagers either side of age-of-consent but that is NOT THE ISSUE UNDER DISCUSSION. And it is disingenuous to bring that up in the context of rape being unambiguously a bad thing to do. He exploits the unintended confusion between "rape" and "statutory rape" where you don't want to trivialise either but the scenarios and severity are all so extremely different.

I really do not appreciate how Aardvaarkman has tried to hijack this discussion into the irrelevant ambiguities of age of consent with older teenagers in close-age parity in a discussion about the fictional depiction of unambiguously forced rape. It is just so transparently disingenuous and trollish of Aardvaarkman.

medv4380:

Father Time:

medv4380:

No AO is intended to be the Movie equivalent of NC-17 which because it's normally a death sentence for a movie results in it being cut down to an R rating, and as the MPAA states

M is the equivalent of an R rating and means that if an adult thinks your mature enough for it they can let you watch.

You should be quoting the ESRB not the MPAA. But there are movies with rapists in them that don't get NC-17 rating.

How about Manhunt 2 having an AO rating. Rape is Strong Sexual Content therefore it should be an AO rating.

and to rub some salt in your wounds

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.

If you cant see how you edit a rape scene so you actually don't show what's going on there really is no helping you.

Gta has strong sexual content and it'd be easy to edit the pick up hooker scene to be rape. Just force her into the car, play the car rocking animation and add screams.

Father Time:

medv4380:

Father Time:

You should be quoting the ESRB not the MPAA. But there are movies with rapists in them that don't get NC-17 rating.

How about Manhunt 2 having an AO rating. Rape is Strong Sexual Content therefore it should be an AO rating.

and to rub some salt in your wounds

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.

If you cant see how you edit a rape scene so you actually don't show what's going on there really is no helping you.

Gta has strong sexual content and it'd be easy to edit the pick up hooker scene to be rape. Just force her into the car, play the car rocking animation and add screams.

GTA was AO because of Hot Coffee, and became M because of Cold Coffee. Or did you miss out on Hot Coffee?

Helmholtz Watson:

Treblaine:
But do you actually "murder" in video games?

Is rape worse than killing your opponent in combat? Murder is UNJUSTIFIED killing.

Have you played Fable, Hitman, Fallout 3, The Elder Scrolls or Prototype? Those games definitely involve murder in them.

Well "justification" doesn't necessarily mean "with approval of the local authorities". Justification means for the purpose of some sense of justice, that may be AGAINST the local authority. Like how often Agent 47 assassinates Drug Lords or corrupt politicians, their authority would of course say that they shouldn't be killed, but the protagonist does have some form of justification.

Under Pakistan law I'm quite sure the killing of Usama Bin Laden is murder, but does that mean it was "unjustified" to raid his compound using extreme lethal force? I don't want to get into a debate about that, but my point is to illustrate how it being murder on the local law books is not that simple for a complete outsider like in a game world with outside players, critics and commentators looking in.

As to open world games where you could conceivably kill anyone, well you are not SUPPOSED to kill the unarmed peaceful civilians. When you are caught doing this you are usually punished by the game mechanics, I really tried hard to avoid killing any civilians in Red Dead Redemption as it really cut down your reputation meter that it was beneficial to have high and very slow to build up but fell quickly. Plus you got hounded by the law for killing civilians. Sure, the bounty was not huge to pay off, and this was probably the game giving you the benefit of the doubt that it might have been an accident.

The only civilian I killed in RDR was in an intense running shoot-out I was being pursued, turning around I shot the first guy on horseback that came over the ridge. Turns out it was someone who had nothing to do with the fight but his friend saw me shoot him down and I had no option to say "No, whoa! I didn't mean that, it was an accident!" especially as the other bandits were still attacking. So with my well known face this guy rode off an reported me for murdering his friend. Good thing it didn't take this as a hanging offence and I just had to pay some blood money as presumably my reputation was enough to insist it was an accident, though really it was the game giving me the benefit of the doubt.

As to the games lock on mechanics even allowing you to lock on to non-combatants this could just be the game being unbiased, the lock on system is there to simulate how the character you play is a better shot than you could possibly be with a thumbstick and makes no judgement call on the validity of the target. For example, when I accidentally killed that innocent man in RDR I just saw a guy on horseback and assumed he was one of the bandits, I locked on the same way John Marston's aiming instincts would to aim. It was entirely down to me - the player - to decide if I was aiming at the right person and I made a huge mistake.

Treblaine:
snip

Now try explaining how being part of the dark brotherhood in TES:Oblivion is not murder. Especially considering what you have to do to get Lucien to visit you.

Also, try to justify how a person gets Skorms bow in Fable.

Father Time:

Gta has strong sexual content and it'd be easy to edit the pick up hooker scene to be rape. Just force her into the car, play the car rocking animation and add screams.

But there isn't any animation for forcing someone into a car, and if there was you are still rearranging elements. Once you are adding in animations then you are talking about a completely different game. It's like splicing in the rape scene from Deliverance into and episode of Sex and the City.

The hot coffee mod did nothing but unlock something, it didn't add nor re-arrange anything. It is like a Easter egg on a DVD movie but you have to access it via a small hack.

medv4380:

Father Time:

medv4380:

How about Manhunt 2 having an AO rating. Rape is Strong Sexual Content therefore it should be an AO rating.

and to rub some salt in your wounds

If you cant see how you edit a rape scene so you actually don't show what's going on there really is no helping you.

Gta has strong sexual content and it'd be easy to edit the pick up hooker scene to be rape. Just force her into the car, play the car rocking animation and add screams.

GTA was AO because of Hot Coffee, and became M because of Cold Coffee. Or did you miss out on Hot Coffee?

Cold coffee gta still had prostitutes and offscreen sex.

And clockwork orange had a graphic rape scene (see it sometime), still an R rating.

Helmholtz Watson:

Treblaine:
snip

Now try explaining how being part of the dark brotherhood in TES:Oblivion is not murder. Especially considering what you have to do to get Lucien to visit you.

Also, try to justify how a person gets Skorms bow in Fable.

Ooooh- kay... I was not aware of that. I almost never play evil alignment in games, I'm too worried it will somehow come back to punish me for it.

Now those examples are very clearly. Yet bringing a kidnapped person to be tortured to death for personal gain is accepted... yet rape is still unaccepted in games.

Hmm, you've made a rather good case of demolishing Jim's argument. As I believe almost all the RPGs have a good or bad alignment and the bad are all doing awful awful unjustifiable things. The Wiki guide prefaces it with "Remember, it's just a game" exactly what defenders of Rapelay and Battle Raper say.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here