Dog-Fighting Game Pulled from Android Market

[coakroach]

My friends and I all roll hunters in WoW, then we tame the smallest and most innocent looking wolves we can find and make them fight each other and place bets, with losing pets not getting fed and being lead into the wilderness where bandits beat them to death.

Come at me bro.

 

[Treblaine]

Naturally, there are always going to be some amoral jerks who look at the practice of forcing dogs to brutally murder each other and say, "Hey, that would make a cool game." Such was the case with Dog Wars, a mobile game on Android where players raised their dogs to fight other dogs. Apparently, it was pretty much just a poor Mafia Wars clone, so the developers can't even say it was an original idea.

The only amoral issue here is putting pets on a pedestal considering the number of other violent games out there, as many people on this thread have pointed out.

According to All Things Digital [http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/20110426/android-dogfighting-game-disappears-from-android-market-following-complaints/], the creators of Dog Wars said that the same free speech that enabled others to criticize the game also protected the game's existence. Of course, while free speech is a legal right in the USA meaning that the government couldn't do anything about the app, Google is a private entity that has the right to control its own services however it damn pleases, so crying "free speech" here is about as legitimate a defense as tissue paper is legitimate body armor.

It raises the question that if a private entity has such a pervasive influence on society then shouldn't the same checks and balances apply to them too.

There definitely needs to be an amendment on monopolistic control.

America has always been wary of monopolies but companies love the control they offer technology has allowed them to have that domination by other means.

Apple is the worst at this. One app store for ALL their devices and that is the ONLY place you can get your applications, that cannot be fair, but it is the precedent that has been set by games consoles and licensing. Blame Nintendo back in 1985.

It wouldn't be a problem but there is no alternative store. Steam is not a problem as absolutely nothing stops me going to GoG or Direct2Drive instead.

It's the limitation, the idea that a company can FORCE you to only use material that has gone through their licensing, or jailbreak and lose out on the services promised.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Wait, so it's fine to shoot non-existent people, but not fine to have non-existent animals fight to the death? Really guys? It's a goddamn game, no one is getting hurt.

 

[Lunafox]

Its nice to know that people are unable to tell the differance between reality and fantisy and we have all these nice big coperations to make sure we don't get them mixed up.

Thank you big censorship peoples, now I'm off to fly out my window like normal people do cause thats what they do in my games and on the nice TV whom tells me everything i need to know.

^_^

Seriously though, Yeah, Real life, this is unexcuseable practice, hence persons who like it should keep it to make believe worlds like those found on your computer

 

[Wicky_42]

I don't get it - as many have pointed out, what makes it any different to be fighting dogs than any other creature, even humans? Bullshit standards. IRL, sure, not a good scene, but it's a game - the leading game on the market has this mode where you murder hundreds of people. It's called 'Call of Duty'. Oh, the humanity ¬_¬ Won't someone think of the poor virtual humans. Geeze...

 

[Sikratua]

So, people will come to complain about me when I have Poochyena beat Growlithe? It's a videogame. We're okay with beating, maiming and killing human beings in games, but dogs are sacred?

 

[KirbyKrackle]

According to All Things Digital [http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/20110426/android-dogfighting-game-disappears-from-android-market-following-complaints/], the creators of Dog Wars said that the same free speech that enabled others to criticize the game also protected the game's existence. Of course, while free speech is a legal right in the USA meaning that the government couldn't do anything about the app, Google is a private entity that has the right to control its own services however it damn pleases, so crying "free speech" here is about as legitimate a defense as tissue paper is legitimate body armor.

It raises the question that if a private entity has such a pervasive influence on society then shouldn't the same checks and balances apply to them too.

While certainly there shouldn't be monopolies, I fail to see the connection between that and a company's right to control what it sells. This is still not a free speech issue. Also, I don't know why amending the US Constitution (which I assume is what's under discussion in most of the related comments) would be particularly useful, since there are already a variety of anti-monopoly laws already in existence, and since the Constitution is, in my understanding (feel free to correct the wayward Canadian, Americans), instructions for the government, not private enterprises.

 

[Urgh76]

Probably already been said, but

Looks like that game........

*glasses*

Got convicted.

YEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH [http://people.rit.edu/~bss6378/instantCSI/]

 

[scythian0528]

I can imagine a PeTa protest of this game.

Fight for the rights of virtual animals. The depiction of animal cruelty is never justified. Imaginary dogs can suffer too!

 

[GamingGoddessV]

You can kill people in video games and real life without much complaint but when you want to kill some dogs, people go crazy. SMDH

 

[krazykidd]

sounds like pokemon to me , anyways , whats the difference of dog VS dog fighting , and Human vs Human fighting ( Mortal kombat , Street fighter, CALL OF DUTY ? [sure shooting people is a okay message right? ] ). Once again , mankind proves that Animals > Human on the 'how much people care' scale.

I'll say it again , sounds like pokemon to me.

 

[Psycho Cat Industries]

For get humans and their evil ways!Just leave those innocent dogs alone!(I lol at my sarcastic statement and then laugh at the wholesome idiocy that the creators of such a game must have possessed in the matter of reaction,and I thought the school shooter was interesting)

 

[Psycho Cat Industries]

My friends and I all roll hunters in WoW, then we tame the smallest and most innocent looking wolves we can find and make them fight each other and place bets, with losing pets not getting fed and being lead into the wilderness where bandits beat them to death.

Come at me bro.

Is that why PETA hates WoW?

 

[2xDouble]

What's wrong? It's about time we had a new aerial combat game...

Wait... it's actual dogs fighting? No, I'm not ok with that.

 

[Elf Defiler Korgan]

Killing people - All right ! Killing Dogs - No way.

Ha! Good one.

And Funk, your bias just gets worse and worse. Can't you just report news without proudly shouting your opinion and how moral you are? Go break up a dog-fighting ring if you think you are so morally righteous.

 

[Xan Krieger]

I'm completely against this game.

Incidentally I fully supported the school shooter half life 2 mod and even told the Escapist about it.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/108065-Inside-the-Sick-Mind-of-a-School-Shooter-Mod.3

 

[Neosage]

How is this worse than the mass of ultra-violent games that already exist? Fair enough if you want to get in PETA's good books, but it's just a GAME (you know that argument we have every time a game get's blamed in a murder? Yeah, you just totally ignored that because the devs went for dogs) I don't approve of Dog Fighting, I don't approve of murdering people either; I still love Hitman.

I'm surprised that I have to state this to a writer for a magazine which knows the argument all to well.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I'm completely against this game.

Incidentally I fully supported the school shooter half life 2 mod and even told the Escapist about it.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/108065-Inside-the-Sick-Mind-of-a-School-Shooter-Mod.3

Then would you care to explain how you resolve the cognitive dissonance evident in that statement? Because frankly, you either think games should be free from censorship, or you don't.