RapeLay

[GreasyDogMeat]

To play devil's advocate, does anyone think there is a point in entertainment where if someone were to play a game and enjoy it you would think differently of that person?

 

Say for instance, you had children and you had a babysitter/family member who watched out for your kids. If you found out that person 'got off' on RapeLay, specifically raping the 10 year old child in the game, would you still trust that person to watch over your kids?

 

I have to admit, I find this discussion interesting. Partly because I feel like a hypocrite. I play and enjoy violent games like GTA and Postal where you can go around and slaughter people at will. The thing is, again, there is nothing that compares with RapeLay in the violence area. You can perform some disgusting kills in Postal, but all of the victims in the game are older and humerous jerks who basically try your patience before you chop their heads off with a shovel and play fetch with their heads with your pit bull. A rape game that would compare to Postal 2 would be one where your targets were all women of age who were raging humerous bitches 'asking for it' and the rape was performed in a 'humerous' way.

 

RapeLay is a game where one of your targets is a child who screams and cries during the assault. While I defend games like Postal 2 and GTA, that these games have merit, entertainment value and wont lead someone to kill who doesn't already have that in themselves, I might change my mind about the merit of a game if it were basically a reflection of RapeLay except focused on violence.

 

A version of RapeLay that was about killing instead of rape would go something like this. You would follow a child on a subway. Once alone you would grab this child and slit their throat. It wouldn't be done in a humerous way, you would be face to face, you would see their tears and hear their screams and begging as they died. That would be the whole game... just brutally killing people. Honestly, if I met someone who enjoyed a game like that I would be a bit worried about being around them.

 

I guess the reason I feel like a hypocrite is because I enjoy Postal 2, and many people have claimed that Postal 2 is nothing but trash, yet I find it can be rather humerous and a nice release after a bad day at work etc. I feel certain lines shouldn't be crossed, if nothing else for the sake of decency.

[Tigranes]

By the way, I don't see anyone drawing comparisons with Colonel Custer, an old American game where you played Custer, and the object of the game was to walk across the screen to an Indian woman tied to a stake and rape her gratuitously.

 

*shrug* New Zealand follows Australia's censor decisions and we've banned the likes of Manhunt and Postal 2 in the past, which I have zero problem with - it's just as gratuitous as RapeLay, just about violence.

[GreasyDogMeat]

By the way, I don't see anyone drawing comparisons with Colonel Custer, an old American game where you played Custer, and the object of the game was to walk across the screen to an Indian woman tied to a stake and rape her gratuitously.

 

*shrug* New Zealand follows Australia's censor decisions and we've banned the likes of Manhunt and Postal 2 in the past, which I have zero problem with - it's just as gratuitous as RapeLay, just about violence.

I don't really see the similarity between a 80s game where the naughty bits are composed of 2 pixels apiece and something like RapeLay from 06'. Further... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a...tersRevenge.jpg Can you really take that seriously?

 

I also don't see how Manhunt/Postal 2 are as gratuitous. One of your targets is an innocent child in RapeLay. Children are not featured as targets in either Manhunt or Postal 2. That is pretty much my point... there is absolutely nothing in violent games that goes as far in their violence as RapeLay goes in its sexual depravity.

[Tigranes]

My point is that media coverage wanted to explore the context of RapeLay. The CNN folks came across it, went WTF, then said, how do we make sense of this? And instead of looking at whether there were parallels in America/other countries, and whether this is a thing with the game industry, they went down the frame of Perverted Weird Japanese/Other - and I'm not entirely sure that was a good decision for objectivity.

 

Regarding 'as gratuitous', well, that's probably an endless argument...

[Gromnir]

as wretched a piece o' computer porno as custer's revenge were, there were not any rape content, though the box advertising implied as much. "revenge" were the name o' the female protagonist, and custer's aim were to... well, you know.

 

some o' our relatives were genuine angry over this thing, so we gots a bit more knowledge o' it than we might like.

 

btw, considering that this were pre-internet, the game got considerable attention back in the 80's... is not as if custer's revenge were ignored, but rapelay got attention.

 

*sigh*

 

internet makes fools o' so many. read some snippet online and thinks you is an expert? yup, game were made and box advertising suggested rape... but no actual rape content. also, other than the internet cnn article, we has seen very little press coverage of japanese rape entertainment, whereas the custer game got nation-wide press here in States covered by both local and national media outlets... which probably led to increased sales.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited April 8, 2010 by Gromnir

[Tigranes]

1) So no rape content? OK, my mistake, I've been misled. Good to find out without first hand experience, I guess.

2) What I'm saying is quite different from "custer's revenge were ignored, but rapelay got attention", is it? Not sure who you're preaching to.

[Gromnir]

1) So no rape content? OK, my mistake, I've been misled. Good to find out without first hand experience, I guess.

2) What I'm saying is quite different from "custer's revenge were ignored, but rapelay got attention", is it? Not sure who you're preaching to.

 

*shrug*

 

you wonder why is no comparison? answer: there is no comparison. not only were there no actual rape in the game you mention (though the game were so ridiculous and poor made that perhaps folks could imagine a rape scenario into the game based on the box advertising,) but the media covered custer to death, whereas the only reputable media outlet we seen giving the current rapelay attention is a snippet from cnn.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Oner]

ME didn't feature full frontal nudity, yet this didn't stop anyone from... well, you know.

[Volourn]

"I also don't see how Manhunt/Postal 2 are as gratuitous. One of your targets is an innocent child in RapeLay. Children are not featured as targets in either Manhunt or Postal 2. That is pretty much my point... there is absolutely nothing in violent games that goes as far in their violence as RapeLay goes in its sexual depravity."

 

Oh my. So it's okay to show violence against adults but not chidlren? I really hate that concept. Violence is not inherently worse, imo, because its commited against chidlren. An innocent is an innocent no matter who old they are. Or gender. Or race.

 

Still, to me, the main point it shouldn't matter what one eprsonally thinks of a game nobody should have a right to say what others can play or watch.

 

It reminds of the movie Irreverisble which had a lot of controversy sorroudning it since it a hardcore, disgusting, and gratutious prolonged rape scene. Don't like it, don't watch it. *shrug*

[Mamoulian War]

P.S. I have never played rapeplay, just read the reviews. Bottom line is if you don't care for it don't play it. Nobody should have the power to tell someone what they can or cannopt do when it dopes not hurt another human being. And, rapelay does not. Period.

There is still the chance that it could indeed hurt another human being. In most games violence and sex are complementary to the objective; which despite the aforementioned, may not be violent. But in RapeLay the main objective is to rape and turn two women into sex slaves, so sex is the main objective.

 

There is still a chance that another human being could be hurt by hot soup...

 

LET'S BAN ALL FORMS OF SOUPS!!! Because someone's main objective might be cooking soups and spilling it on others, during his walk around the friendly neighbourhood!!!

[GreasyDogMeat]

Oh my. So it's okay to show violence against adults but not chidlren? I really hate that concept. Violence is not inherently worse, imo, because its commited against chidlren. An innocent is an innocent no matter who old they are. Or gender. Or race.

A child is not a race or religion, it is a vulnerable age group and it isn't any form of 'ism' to feel more protective of them than an adult. Is your emotional response to violence truly identical no matter the age of the victim? I find that hard to believe.

[Meshugger]

I wonder if there are any games out there that lets the player to utilize the ultimate form of aggression: Cannibalism.

 

Track your victims, kill them, and eat them. Is that more "wrong" than RapeLay?

[Oner]

Fallout 3.

[Hurlshort]

Oh my. So it's okay to show violence against adults but not chidlren? I really hate that concept. Violence is not inherently worse, imo, because its commited against chidlren. An innocent is an innocent no matter who old they are. Or gender. Or race.

A child is not a race or religion, it is a vulnerable age group and it isn't any form of 'ism' to feel more protective of them than an adult. Is your emotional response to violence truly identical no matter the age of the victim? I find that hard to believe.

 

Seconded. Thankfully the entire field of law also disagrees with Volourn, as crimes against children carry much stiffer punishments than crimes against adults.

[Calax]

I wonder if there are any games out there that lets the player to utilize the ultimate form of aggression: Cannibalism.

 

Track your victims, kill them, and eat them. Is that more "wrong" than RapeLay?

Fallout 3, arguably WoW (one of the undead racials is to literally get health back by eating a dead humanoid).

 

On the of S&M that somebody mentioned above. From what I understand it isn't always safe... these are people who are looking for a thrill and a sense of powerlessnesss, there have been deaths from people who take it to far and either don't let the partner breath for just a tiny bit to long, or whatever.

 

Honestly, the biggest thing about this is that children are involved. No western game to my knowledge has featured children in situations where they may be hurt/killed/whatever. GTA's liberty city will be depopulated in a generation, COD4's middle east civilians all sent their kids away to another country, in Gun the wild west doesn't have much of a family workforce... sometimes this is explained (FEAR has the only child seen start slaughtering people, HL2 has the inhibitor field) but most of the time not. Heck some games (Like Gun) only have a few women that are visible in cutscenes only.

 

Also, something to note is the ending to rapelay, you either get stabbed by one of the girls in bed, or thrown in front of a train for being a horrible horrible monster (back when this first came to Americas attention, somebody did a review showing the woman stabbing the guy with a butcher knife as he sprayed blood like a MGS enemy). Does this necessarily make up for the fact that you play as a rapist who also impregnates the women? No, but it does kinda send a message tho don't it?

[213374U]

On the of S&M that somebody mentioned above. From what I understand it isn't always safe... these are people who are looking for a thrill and a sense of powerlessnesss, there have been deaths from people who take it to far and either don't let the partner breath for just a tiny bit to long, or whatever.

If you dig deep enough, you can find that people have died from any number of seemingly stupid and/or harmless things. Including, but not limited to, autoerotic asphyxiation...

[Calax]

On the of S&M that somebody mentioned above. From what I understand it isn't always safe... these are people who are looking for a thrill and a sense of powerlessnesss, there have been deaths from people who take it to far and either don't let the partner breath for just a tiny bit to long, or whatever.

If you dig deep enough, you can find that people have died from any number of seemingly stupid and/or harmless things. Including, but not limited to, autoerotic asphyxiation...

My point was more that S&M is much easier to get out of hand than your average thing, after all, at some point one person is put in near total control of the other and one mistake leads to death, same with autoerotic asphyxiation, but without the power transfer.

[Volourn]

" No western game to my knowledge has featured children in situations where they may be hurt/killed/whatever. "

 

L0L Some of the most popular Western games involve killing children. FO allows you to put dynamite on kiddies and blow them up. DA allows you to coldly murder a child. The BGs featured killable kids. The list can go on as well.

[Calax]

" No western game to my knowledge has featured children in situations where they may be hurt/killed/whatever. "

 

L0L Some of the most popular Western games involve killing children. FO allows you to put dynamite on kiddies and blow them up. DA allows you to coldly murder a child. The BGs featured killable kids. The list can go on as well.

Huh, I guess as long as you have the choice not to be a complete murderous psychopath then it's perfectly ok.

[Gorgon]

It's rather strange to refer to the kids in bg as 'killable' and even stranger to insist that killing kids is a persistent theme in any of the games mentioned.

[Killian Kalthorne]

Just because you can kill children in a game doesn't make killing children the primary goal, though having the title "Champion Childkiller" in Fallout 1 and 2 sparked me as being humorous.

 

Yes, yes. I know. I am one sick puppy.

[Volourn]

"Just because you can kill children in a game doesn't make killing children the primary goal, though having the title "Champion Childkiller" in Fallout 1 and 2 sparked me as being humorous.

 

Yes, yes. I know. I am one sick puppy. "

 

Yup. Going by some people's logic, the fact you 'enjoy' killing fictional kiddies in a fictional games means youa re a closet child killer who is one step away from mass murdering a bunch of real life. That logic is just plain baloney.

 

 

"It's rather strange to refer to the kids in bg as 'killable' and even stranger to insist that killing kids is a persistent theme in any of the games mentioned."

 

Don't be daft. Nowhere did I claim it was a major feature (though killing FO kiddies was HUGELY popular by a huge number of its players); but my postw as a response to someone stating that Werstyern games don't have killable kids. They do. Period. It's undisputable fact. I can't say it's all that strange that a grogan can't read. As, it's pretty obvious.

[Calax]

"It's rather strange to refer to the kids in bg as 'killable' and even stranger to insist that killing kids is a persistent theme in any of the games mentioned."

 

Don't be daft. Nowhere did I claim it was a major feature (though killing FO kiddies was HUGELY popular by a huge number of its players); but my postw as a response to someone stating that Werstyern games don't have killable kids. They do. Period. It's undisputable fact. I can't say it's all that strange that a grogan can't read. As, it's pretty obvious.

And there's the point. No game features that level of amorality from the western us. And I'd like to point out that you seem to have selective perception as my original post featured "TO MY KNOWLEDGE" within the text that you were responding to.

[Hurlshort]

Let's not forget the killing of kids (or anyone) in Fallout was cartoonish and silly.

 

Personally I wouldn't play a game that presented death in a realistic manner, with blood curdling screams and all that.

[Volourn]

"And I'd like to point out that you seem to have selective perception as my original post featured "TO MY KNOWLEDGE" within the text that you were responding to. "

 

Nope. No selective perception, actually. All i did was poitned out that you were mistaken. I did not bash you at all. All I did was give examples of games that do allow violence against children. *shrug*

 

 

"No game features that level of amorality from the western us."

 

Oh, I'm sorry. Blowing up children with dynamite is not as immoral as raping them. Geez. Don't you see how silly that is? You even get awarded in Fo for doing so with what their special perks. LMAO

Edited April 9, 2010 by Volourn