should you be able to do anything in a crpg?

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Some people are more prone and suggestable to outside sources than others. What I find interesting about metadigitals stance, is that he is perfectly willing to accept that a game could socialise a child in a positive way, but not in a negative way. To me that is completely illogical.

 

At the heart of this is that RPGs should offer choice, you should not simply get to a point where crime = punishment. And logically if a child who witnesses crime being a punished in game would have a postive reinforcement, then one who constantly escapes "justice" in game would have a negative reinforcement. All of which would make the game as potentially harmful as it is benificial.

[metadigital]

.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Some people are more prone and suggestable to outside sources than others. What I find interesting about metadigitals stance, is that he is perfectly willing to accept that a game could socialise a child in a positive way, but not in a negative way. To me that is completely illogical.

 

At the heart of this is that RPGs should offer choice, you should not simply get to a point where crime = punishment. And logically if a child who witnesses crime being a punished in game would have a postive reinforcement, then one who constantly escapes "justice" in game would have a negative reinforcement. All of which would make the game as potentially harmful as it is benificial.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually I don't think the presentation of darker froms of abuse would have any effect at all.

 

I was merely indicating that the best way to handle such delicate matters is in an idealist way. After all, as real as we want a game to be, almost everyone believes in some sort of cosmic justice, where "what goes around comes around", and we all therefore regard it as an essential that those who are willfully and deliberately evil to their fellow humans should and will be dealt some sort of appropriate come-uppance. To have an evil person "get away with it" might be more real, but it isn't going to sell many film tickets or game licences.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I was merely indicating that the best way to handle such delicate matters is in an idealist way. After all, as real as we want a game to be, almost everyone believes in some sort of cosmic justice, where "what goes around comes around", and we all therefore regard it as an essential that those who are willfully and deliberately evil to their fellow humans should and will be dealt some sort of appropriate come-uppance. To have an evil person "get away with it" might be more real, but it isn't going to sell many film tickets or game licences.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In games with evil endings, you do get away with it. You get your evil reward, and the game then ends.

[metadigital]

In games with evil endings, you do get away with it. You get your evil reward, and the game then ends.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes but those are cartoon games. K1 was a cartoon. At no point did anyone even get maimed; no blood, no gore, no orphans eating pets to survive, no prostitution of the underclass, nor religious pogrom of the minority.

 

Children can see the difference.

 

And I would have liked Mr Dastardly to win the Wacky Races once or twice -- and even catch that pigeon. (There was a Road Runner cartoon made where Wile E Coyote catches Road Runner, but it has been self-censored by Warner Bros and rarely shown. But that is an aesthetic reason, not a moral one.)

 

You wouldn't sell many games where the protagonist is a murdering paedophile and the plot revolves around committing unspeakable crimes and ultimately escaping conviction. No one would want to play it, let alone buy it.

 

The recent JFK game at least was (allegedly) trying to teach some historical background to the assassination of JFK. (And that was roundly ostracized.)

 

Children aren't obtuse, and they aren't inherently more evil than adults. But they do have good BS detectors, and suffer hypocrisy not at all, like adults. Certainly, some themes are mature for a reason; sarcasm is not easy for a child to grasp (I remember my first encounter with it). That said, adult themes wouldn't be given to a child audience, by definition. (And you can't legislate for the exception to the rule.)

[213374U]

Well, I would argue that's all supposition. At the turn of the century the most popular film was simply a train shot from front on hurtling at the audience. That's it. People in the audience would jump out of their seats to avoid what they thought was certain collision with the train their eyes told them was about to hit them.

 

People didn't think that it was okay to stand in front of a steam locomotive and emulate the experience in RL. None.

 

After a while, the audiences became savvy to this, and now we have CGI to try to make dynosaurs real and such in an ever-increasing gradient to mimick reality. It doesn't change the fact that one is real and one is not, however convincing we try to make it. Maybe one day we'll have a direct transfer of emotion to the cortex, or some equivalent, and maybe then it might start to get difficult to tell reality from virtuality. Not yet. Not by us, and not by children.

"Thanks" for simplifying my argument. I wasn't saying that if you murder someone in an ultra-realistic game you instantly become a psycho. However, violent acts are not commited with a cool head most of the times. People with anger management issues have very thin safeguards to prevent them from going berserk in a situation that tests their self-control. If such person is used to graphic, ultra-explicit violence, a violent act may not seem so out of place, since the "WTF am I doing?" threshold has been lifted somewhat.

And people with anger management issues are not exactly rare.

 

Note that I'm not against violent games. I was just arguing that "normal" people are not impervious to constant exposure to graphic violence, and that is a fact.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Children aren't obtuse, and they aren't inherently more evil than adults. But they do have good BS detectors, and suffer hypocrisy not at all, like adults. Certainly, some themes are mature for a reason; sarcasm is not easy for a child to grasp (I remember my first encounter with it). That said, adult themes wouldn't be given to a child audience, by definition. (And you can't legislate for the exception to the rule.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think your underestimating just how suggestable children can be. Dont forget we are not talking about a 5 second exposure here, or even a 2 hour movie but something that should "ideally" be pushing 60 hours of gameplay.

 

Children copy all the time, thats why shows like PowerRangers come with a disclaimer. BTW if you search you should be able to find a couple of instances where children were hurt copying things from that show.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

"Thanks" for simplifying my argument. I wasn't saying that if you murder someone in an ultra-realistic game you instantly become a psycho. However, violent acts are not commited with a cool head most of the times. People with anger management issues have very thin safeguards to prevent them from going berserk in a situation that tests their self-control. If such person is used to graphic, ultra-explicit violence, a violent act may not seem so out of place, since the "WTF am I doing?" threshold has been lifted somewhat.

And people with anger management issues are not exactly rare.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think that putting the person in the role of instigator rather than observer also magnifies the effect. I remember playing Manhunt for the first time, at first it I was quite shocked, not so much by the violence, but rather that it could make it into a game. By the time I'd been playing for a couple of hours, suffocating people with plastics bags, sticking shards of glass through their eyes and caving in their skulls with crowbars (all in slow mo close up cut scene esque detail) had become routine.

[Azarkon]

I would rather not see games, or any medium of entertainment, for that matter, become a vehicle for social engineering.

 

That is all.

[Zagor]

Some examples I don't want to see in games:

 

phedophilia (not very likely to happen fortunately)

racism

rape

wifebeating

negative view upon homosexuals

childkilling

 

Some of these could be ok if handled correctly, for example, you could meet a woman in a game who's been raped by someone. That wouldn't be a problem, she could tell you about it, and be very upset.

What would have been wrong was if you (the pc) was the rapist yourself.

 

Some things that's ok (in my opinion)

 

violence between adults

blood

sex and nudity (again, depends on how you do it)

All manner of evil acts, murder , theft, betrayal and so on

the devil, hell , and demons (I know some religious people have a problem with this)

 

So, as I said before, I think it's all a matter of where you think you should draw the line.

And I still think that most developers know where to draw it. One example is

the upcoming battlefield 2 game. the developers digital illusions have stated, that in order to prevent any anti-islam-racism undertones, they where careful not to portray the arabs as more evil than the other factions.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Some examples I don't want to see in games:

 

phedophilia (not very likely to happen fortunately)

racism

rape

wifebeating

negative view upon homosexuals

childkilling

 

Some of these could be ok if handled correctly, for example, you could meet a woman in a game who's been raped by someone. That wouldn't be a problem, she could tell you about it, and be very upset.

What would have been wrong was if you (the pc) was the rapist yourself.

 

Some things that's ok (in my opinion)

 

violence between adults

blood

sex and nudity (again, depends on how you do it)

All manner of evil acts, murder , theft, betrayal and so on

the devil, hell , and demons (I know some religious people have a problem with this)

 

So, as I said before, I think it's all a matter of where you think you should draw the line.

And I still think that most developers know where to draw it. One example is

the upcoming battlefield 2 game. the developers digital illusions have stated, that in order to prevent any anti-islam-racism undertones, they where careful not to portray the arabs as more evil than the other factions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Racism is kind of at the core of most RPG's although because it's in a form that is barely recognisable its not bad. D&D especially tends to have a they are bad just because they are XX approach.

 

I was playing one of the Fire Emblem games earlier ,and a thought struck me. It's not really about child killing per se, but rather killing of unarmed non combatant children.

 

The closer you get to reality the more difficult it becomes. As I said RPGs have a kind of inherent protection as they generally dont depict reality in the way something like Battle Field does.

 

All in all though not bad guidlines.

[Child of Flame]

What I don't understand, is that you are all generally in agreement that the only people truly affected in a severe way by videogame violence are young children (as in under 10 years of age), and you still claim that the parents would not have a good enough handle on their children to keep them from being exposed to such material.

 

I don't know about everyone else, but when I was younger, I wasn't at all rebellious. In fact, I remember one time I was over at a young mate's house, and he was playing Quake (actually, this was closer to 11 or 12 years of age, but the point stand), now this was acceptable in his parents eyes, but my parents had forbade me to play such things, and because of the sense of morality they had instilled in me, I didn't.

 

If parents can't keep the reins on their under 13 year old children, maybe they should think twice before having children.

[Zagor]

You must have been a very nice kid , when I was young, I played the most gory games available. And all my friends too.

But back then the technology was so primitive, the goriest you could get was barbarian and commando libya, for the c64.

In barbarian you could chop off heads with a sword, and in c. libya you could execute warprisoners standing against a wall with a machinegun.

I like to add, my parents are very good, they just didn't know.

 

And I think everyone is affected by what we see and experience, myself included, but kids are naturally more affected than adults.

[Volourn]

Again, everything should be open up in games. Even such heinous crimes as rape, racism, and mass murder. As long as its handled maturely; and even if it sin't you cna just ignore said game.

 

Games do not make rapists. Or mass murderers. Or racists.

 

 

Period.

[Zagor]

Yes if it's handled in a mature way, and I don't think it is, if the game lets you rape a woman you find in a prisoncell for example.

But it would be ok if the woman was raped before by someone else, and you get to know about it.

I think letting you commit a rape yourself would be an immature way of dealing with the issue.

I'm not against serious themes in games, if handled correctly and in a mature way.

[213374U]

Games do not make rapists. Or mass murderers. Or racists.

 

 

Period.

Ah, life is so simple when things are black or white, isn't it?

 

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

You have to wonder about the sort of people who want that sort of thing in a game, or a movie for that matter. Personally I see no reason to indulge their sick and twisted fantasies, whether they be virtual or a sign of something more serious.

[Musopticon?]

If parents can't keep the reins on their under 13 year old children, maybe they should think twice before having children.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree, but giving blind eye to their children's video game endeavours isn't exactly "not keeping the reins". No, I wouldn't let my kids play Hitman when they're eight, unless very responsible already, but games have a rather minor

effect on children's mental well-being and morale growth. That's why letting them play what they want, in sensible limits, is fine by me.

[GhostofAnakin]

Volo, what did your parents let you play when you were growing up? I want to make sure I avoid letting my kids play that stuff. :D

[Volourn]

"Ah, life is so simple when things are black or white, isn't it?"

 

Give me actual undisputable proof that a game cause someone to rape, murder, or some other heinous crime where the game was the main factor and not drug useage, horrible/non existent parenting, or other mental/social problems. You cna't. There is no true link between games and murder. Tak away ALL outside negative influences, and a game is as harmless as nonchokeable spaghetti.

 

 

"You have to wonder about the sort of people who want that sort of thing in a game, or a movie for that matter."

 

A. Go play Pokemon.

 

B. It's simple. I want to deal with real mature problems; not kiddifying everything. The world is a harsh place with really evil or sick people in it. I think games that really want to be mature should show this. Some of the best movies, and tv shows have had storylines that deal with rape and when they deal with it right; it's a very moving experience that one can feel the pain of a victim espicially when said victim eventually deals with the problem and fights back. I want a hero, or heroine who truly fights against the odds delaing with real issue; not always mass murdeirng million of the Uber Bad Guy's retarded goons.

 

Game over.

 

P.S. If you cna't handle mature themes in games avoid my mods at ALL costs, NumbersU.

 

 

"Volo, what did your parents let you play when you were growing up? I want to make sure I avoid letting my kids play that stuff. "

 

No limits on what I watrched or played. And, guess what?

 

I have commited:

 

0 rapes

 

0 mass murders

 

0 murders

 

0 assaults

 

0 other heinous crimes.

 

 

Game over.

[213374U]

"Ah, life is so simple when things are black or white, isn't it?"

 

Give me actual undisputable proof that a game cause someone to rape, murder, or some other heinous crime where the game was the main factor and not drug useage, horrible/non existent parenting, or other mental/social problems. You cna't. There is no true link between games and murder. Tak away ALL outside negative influences, and a game is as harmless as nonchokeable spaghetti.

When Volo begins to turn the discussion into a black or white issue and then asks for proof for one of his absurd extremes, it's obvious I have won.

 

 

You Lose!

[Volourn]

I win. Your over sized words is just your way to lamely to an ego stroke as to make yourself 'think' you win. The difference is, is that I *know* that i have won.

 

Game over.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

A. Go play Pokemon.

 

B. It's simple. I want to deal with real mature problems; not kiddifying everything. The world is a harsh place with really evil or sick people in it. I think games that really want to be mature should show this. Some of the best movies, and tv shows have had storylines that deal with rape and when they deal with it right; it's a very moving experience that one can feel the pain of a victim espicially when said victim eventually deals with the problem and fights back. I want a hero, or heroine who truly fights against the odds delaing with real issue; not always mass murdeirng million of the Uber Bad Guy's retarded goons.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If thats supposed to be an insult you missed the mark by a mile.

 

Yes when you are the observer viewing that sort of thing can evoke sympathy. BIG difference here in a game your not the observer your the instigator.

[Volourn]

But, if it's a role-playing game; you should have the option. Why? Having chocies yet not being able to choose NOT ot be evil hurts the choice of being good as there is no real choice at all.

 

Situation: PC comes across a woman wlaking on the road. If they are role-playinga s cumbag they can choose to do bad things tm., and it makes their character bad. There's a reason why it's called choosing to be 'evil'. It's obvious to the player (or at bleast should be) that their character is Evil tm. for committing such acts that it's not meant to be admired. Afterall, anyone who has enjoyed playing playing games like FO, PST, BG, Arcanum, and JE know full well you can LOTS of dispicable acts. Being able to choose to do dispicable acts makes choosing NOT do them even more meaningful as you chose to be Goody Two Shoes tm. unlike a game like FF where you *have* to be good.

 

Game over. Again.

 

 

P.S. Youa re wrong also about games not being able to make the player feel sympathy. I know you like to bash JE; but many people who have played 'evil' in that game said how they felt bad about their character doing certain dispicable act that they either reloaded and chose another option, repented, or had to play again right awya as to 'make it up to the fictional characters'

 

You lose.

 

Come on, guys. This is wayyyyyyyyy tooooooooooo easyyyyyyyyyyyyy.........

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

P.S. Youa re wrong also about games not being able to make the player feel sympathy. I know you like to bash JE; but many people who have played 'evil' in that game said how they felt bad about their character doing certain dispicable act that they either reloaded and chose another option, repented, or had to play again right awya as to 'make it up to the fictional characters'

 

You lose.

 

Come on, guys. This is wayyyyyyyyy tooooooooooo easyyyyyyyyyyyyy.........

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And equally there are players who abslutely thrive on being as evil as they can. People are different there are no absolutes here. No black and white, no easy answers.

[Volourn]

"And equally there are players who abslutely thrive on being as evil as they can."

 

So let 'em. It doesn't mean they're gonna commit rape in RL. That's just dumb. Games do not make rapist, murderers, or whatever heinous crime. Nor, do they make people into Little Angels tm. Morals like that are learned socially and part of someone's 'inherent' persoanlity. It's not taken from a game. Period.