Japanese Eroge Company Renames Rape Games to "Platinum Games"

[geldonyetich]

actually, my argument is that neither type of game is particularly wrong. if you believe that super violent games should be subject to the same restrictions you're proposing for sex games, well, that's certainly a tenable position. it is, however, one i do not share.

Well, I suppose that is the other possible interpretation of "the argument that selling RapeLay condones rape can be applied equally well to GTA condoning murder." It just doesn't make much sense considering the context in which you delivered it was a reply to my outlining that RapeLay might bring more harm than the free speech of restricting it.

 

[UsefulPlayer 1]

Wow. I did not know there was a game were you go and rape girls.

That's some messed up shit.

Ah well, what are you gonna do right? So long as they don't do anything perverted or break any laws IRL then it's all jolly good.

 

[Hiroshi Mishima]

First thing first... that pic of the three girls. The one in the middle needs some serious breast reduction. It looks like she's suffering from "Dead or Alive Syndrome", a nasty sorta disease if ever there was one.

Anyways, onto the topic. The first thing that I noticed was that the author is quite right in saying the renaming to "thoroughbred" is fucking creepy as shit and just serves to further paint the people who make the games and buy them in a horrible light. It's like their fully endorsing and condoning the actions in the games as perfectly okay and even going so far as to call it a competitive sport where in you raise the best.. erhm... "animal" that you can. Really, it sounds like their calling these girls animals bred for amusement and pleasure. They're fucking Human Beings, but of course since when does that matter to some people.

Especially considering the kinda shit I Japan peddling some days...

Secondly, calling them "Platinum Games" as the author also pointed out, will indeed be a misleading title for such a genre. However, I am also sadly willing to admit his last point about it possibly being their "greatest hits" as well.

*sigh* The world sure is fucked up... Between this kinda crap, and the shit that women have to deal with in the middle east, it really is hard to shake the feeling that Humans as a whole still haven't been able to get it through their thick skulls that other Humans are.. you know.. fucking HUMANS, like they are. Still, I'd love to see the roles reverses for a bit in some places.. just to see how the males react.

Yeah, I suppose I think strangely for a guy.

 

[Axle_Bullitt_19]

Aren't Sony's classic games already sold under the Platinum name?

I can't wait to hear what they make of this...

That would be Microsoft. Sony uses Greatest Hits.

 

[Triple G]

They're games people, come on. Manhunt had you murder people as violently and efficiently as possible. If that's allowed in a game, anything should be allowed in a game if the people want it. We, as the developed world, believe censorship is bad, remember? Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it should be banned.

What if I was in charge and banned something like...bacon? Or Christianity? They're two things that majority of people in the U.S. want, but I can argue that both of them have a bad affect on people.

In summary: do to others as you would have done unto you. Don't censor lest ye be censored.

Call me a weak-stomached fool who wants to shut down games because I don't personally like them, but if I were in charge, those 'rape games' would be banned, all of them, and I'd put out a notice saying, 'If you attempt to replicate said rape simulators, there will be severe consequences and/or lawsuits against your companies.'

Creating a rape simulator is never justified no matter what you try and call it.

Calling one of those games a rape simulator is just as accurate as calling CoD:4 a murder simulator. Welcome to the forums, Jack Thompson.

P.S.- I've played RapeLay, and I still know nothing about raping women.

I think you're right. It's a game, it's not real. If we would an a game because it contais illegal aactivities then we might just ban all games. I find it very interesting how people who play FPS(a game about KILLING people) complain about rape games. What is better, killing 50+ simulated Enemies in a FPS or raping 3 women in a rape simulator? Nothing of both because it isn't real. When I play FPS it doesn't mean I will kill people and if I play a rape simulator it doesn't mean I will rape people.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Aren't Sony's classic games already sold under the Platinum name?

I can't wait to hear what they make of this...

That would be Microsoft. Sony uses Greatest Hits.

Define classic? Aside from normal packages, they have different packages with red banners on them saying "Greatest Hits." However, Microsoft labels such games with "Platinum Hits."

<spoiler=Playstation Platinum> http://www.beefjack.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/mgs4platinum.jpg
You don't get it in the US which is why Xbox can call itself Platinum (over here it's Xbox classics). If a game sells 400'000 units within a year of release in the PAL region it gets put on the Platinum range which go for half price. As far as I know only the PAL regions get Platinum.

PS1 and 2 cases are silver not yellow, it's been around since the PS1's early days.

 

[IrrelevantTangent]

Could you respond to my stance, specifically that creating rape simulators is wrong, WITHOUT making ad hominem attacks

No.

You're admitting to making a logical fallacy and then continuing to use it anyway? Clever. Until you feel like having a reasonable discussion, this debate is over.

Don't flatter yourself. I'm not debating you to begin with.

No, you're just hurling ad hominem attacks at me because I disagreed with you.

Just like the half-a-dozen others who are doing the exact same thing because they either A) didn't bother to read my post several pages before involving me apologizing for wording my opening post so strongly or B) selectively choose to ignore said post so they can continue insulting me.

And since you continue to ignore it, here's the post right here, which I posted on the THIRD PAGE:

I respect your opinion, but I have to ask. Are you saying that's how it shouldbe? Or how you'd like it to be?

I personally can't see any valid logic in banning something harmless because the content makes you uncomfortable. It's not like these are mainstream on-shelve games. They're simply a different style of porn, and should be treated as such.

Honestly? It's how I'd like it to be. I probably should have mentioned beforehand that I'm not completely objective about this whole event; rape is something I've always been disgusted by.

Maybe my initial post was a bit too strong, but I guess you could say that was my knee-jerk reaction to this news. Sorry if I caused any confusion.

 

[KarumaK]

SNIP*

Problem, not human. Bits of data, pixels, zeros and ones. All correct ways to refer to game characters. They are not human they are programs.

 

[Jacques 2]

Could you respond to my stance, specifically that creating rape simulators is wrong, WITHOUT making ad hominem attacks

No.

You're admitting to making a logical fallacy and then continuing to use it anyway? Clever. Until you feel like having a reasonable discussion, this debate is over.

Don't flatter yourself. I'm not debating you to begin with.

No, you're just hurling ad hominem attacks at me because I disagreed with you.

Just like the half-a-dozen others who are doing the exact same thing because they either A) didn't bother to read my post several pages before involving me apologizing for wording my opening post so strongly or B) selectively choose to ignore said post so they can continue insulting me.

And since you continue to ignore it, here's the post right here, which I posted on the THIRD PAGE:

I respect your opinion, but I have to ask. Are you saying that's how it shouldbe? Or how you'd like it to be?

I personally can't see any valid logic in banning something harmless because the content makes you uncomfortable. It's not like these are mainstream on-shelve games. They're simply a different style of porn, and should be treated as such.

Honestly? It's how I'd like it to be. I probably should have mentioned beforehand that I'm not completely objective about this whole event; rape is something I've always been disgusted by.

Maybe my initial post was a bit too strong, but I guess you could say that was my knee-jerk reaction to this news. Sorry if I caused any confusion.

I call it the hyperquote, second only to the great pyramid of spoiler quotes. Moving on from this non-achievements:

In the beginning of this thread, you posted a simple opinion with no backing that was perceivable as the reality that you wanted to live in.

You apologized for the harshness of this comment, but the problem is, you're posts haven't changed in content since then, the apology means nothing if it is without result. You've yet to actually come up with a response to the many opposing arguments presented here that goes beyond an opinion or an abstract that is ultimately arbitrary to the subject except in terms of headline word mentions. If you don't believe you're making headway with someone, why bother continuing to repeat the same post over and over again? It's useless on both sides, so try and give a response to this, perhaps, which as far as I know, doesn't include ad-hominem attacks on your character. I have instead attempted to be as civil and reasonable as possible to avoid this excuse not to make a reply

Just a quick question to those who argue that you can choose not to kill people in GTA, that are not trying to kill you? Have you ever played GTA and if so, did you make that choice? Even Mario involves killing to some extent, via the crushing weight of an Italian plumber (why don't we scream weightist and racism for that?) coming to bear upon small animals, some of which, do not have any ability or will to harm you unless you directly approach them. I know one person, who hasn't killed anyone in GTA, but played it, not that they made it very far, but they played it for a half hour without killing anyone, they might be more objective than some of the arguers here, but I doubt anyone here could give that view, short of never playing a video game.

Video games are artificial constructs in which there are entities that are modeled, textured, and/or animated, to resemble people, animals, objects, buildings, and ideas. Depending on the nature of the construct, you may apply certain effects to certain entities via certain actions. These entities then respond in a predetermined way, or one of several predetermined results in order to simulate variety or give a sense of randomness, or simply to remove the repetitiveness that a single repeating response can cause. The creators of the construct, or later modifiers, enable the player to effect objects in specific ways. In pong, you move you're player, which is a paddle, to come into contact with a dot that then reflects off of you according to the way you hit it, slowing or speeding up depending on the movement rate of the paddle. That dot then traverses what is defined as an empty space with 2 walls, perpendicular to the paddles, the goal being to get the dot to pass the opponent's side of the screen. The dot is a mathematically drawn circle, shaded in with pixels, which represents the idea of a ball. It is not a ball, it is a virtual entity taking on the appearance of one, with limited believability. You can apply to that entity certain meanings from outside of the construct, but that dot has only the meaning it is supplied by it's creators in the format it was created in; it has no feelings, no imagination, no thoughts, it is an entity in a construct.

Were an entity to be created that could think or feel, then ethics would be a question.

 

[nick4118]

Woooow,thats pretty messed up. Thoroughbred games? I don't know whats worse, that they're still making the games, that they're trying to hide them by changing the names, or that it's working

 

[IrrelevantTangent]

You apologized for the harshness of this comment, but the problem is, you're posts haven't changed in content since then, the apology means nothing if it is without result. You've yet to actually come up with a response to the many opposing arguments presented here that goes beyond an opinion or an abstract that is ultimately arbitrary to the subject except in terms of headline word mentions. If you don't believe you're making headway with someone, why bother continuing to repeat the same post over and over again? It's useless on both sides, so try and give a response to this, perhaps, which as far as I know, doesn't include ad-hominem attacks on your character. I have instead attempted to be as civil and reasonable as possible to avoid this excuse not to make a reply

Your statement that my posts haven't changed in content since then makes no sense. I haven't been trying to restate my original opinion, and the only reason WHY I have been posting in this thread is to point out that YES, I DID apologize for wording my original post too strongly, and to try to get a few certain people who keep constantly harassing me off my back.

I don't care who's right and who's wrong in this debate, not anymore, but for the love of God, stop insulting me over something I've already apologized for.

 

[Jacques 2]

unfortunately, on forums such as this, resolution rarely comes from anything except total submission or just leaving the thread. I learned that the hard way a long time ago in a religious debate thread some thousand pages long.

 

[bad rider]

However, simply calling this censorship is slightly off, it's merely addressing the knee-jerk issue. The real problem at the bottom of this whole thing has nothing to do with free speech.

Instead, it has to do with if one's open-mindedness is so very open-minded as to induce genuine harm. In a scenario out of the game, we don't walk through a park and see a man raping a screaming 10-year-old girl, shrug, and keep walking, thinking to ourselves, "well, who am I to judge?" So there's a definite limit to how open-minded you can be before you're condoning harm. In other words, there's a point where being open-minded is no longer a function of intelligence, but rather an irresponsible lack thereof.

Creating games about raping people is pretty close to that line. It's a bit of a stretch to say that a game like RapeLay will definitely get a person to start raping people, even psychological experiments finding varying results. However, it's not a stretch at all to say that the open sale of such a product is condoning rape on the level of being content in a game you can buy. At the point where we're a society that chooses to condone rape on an additional level, we're that much closer to the "well, who am I to judge" scenario above.

So, when you break it all down to the fundamentals, the reason why a restriction of a game like RapeLay applies is because the harm condoning it may bring to a society is greater than the harm not condoning it may bring to the benefit free speech brings to society.

this same argument applies equally well to murder or any other crime portrayed in video games.

Yes, but as this post [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/7.128903.2785009] clearly outlines, you can't just say, "well, we allow violent games, so lets allow a game about tracking down and raping a 10-year-old." The reason being that the context is totally different, and the severity is a major factor.

i didn't say that. what i said was the argument that selling RapeLay condones rape can be applied equally well to GTA condoning murder. both encourage the player to commit violent crimes and reward them for doing so. if GTA isn't "severe" enough for you, i can point you to games about killing jews in concentration camps, or a suicide bomber trying to kill george w. bush.

And I just showed how it's not quite that simple. However, lets say I just accept your point at face value. What difference does this observation make?

Basically, you're trying to argue that one wrong makes two wrongs right. Does it really work that way?

I can find super violent games so we should have super sexual games! I can find examples of murder in real life, so there should be rape in real life too! Timmy hit me, so I raped Suzy!

No, it doesn't work that way. You might see this logic on a forum (e.g. alcohol's okay so MJ should be ok) and you'll even find supporters of that logic, but there is the only place the logic works: in uninformed mob rule.

This is because it's completely fallacious if you dig but an inch or two deeper: one wrong never makes two wrongs right, especially when you realize that these two wrongs are quite unlike eachother.

Erm his point is double standards on issues that are equally severe. For instance, murder is wrong, rape is wrong, I would say they are on par(give or take one to the other). Ergo, why is it okay for e.g. manhunt (lets go murder everyone) to be released, yet these rape games dont.
Just for the record, I didn't buy Manhunt and I don't buy eroge games. It's your choice what you buy, its not your choice to dictate that to other people.

Edit: Cleaned this post up a bit.

 

[geldonyetich]

Erm his point is double standards on issues that are equally severe. Murder is wrong rape is wrong, I would say they are on par. So given that why is it okay for eg manhunt lets go murder everyone to be released yet these eroge games dont. Just for the record, I didn't buy Manhunt and I don't buy eroge games. It's your choice what you buy, its not your choice to dictate that to other people.

That particular guy I was replying to completely butchered his paragraph, so I'd say your interpretation is as good as mine.

 

[bad rider]

Erm his point is double standards on issues that are equally severe. Murder is wrong rape is wrong, I would say they are on par. So given that why is it okay for eg manhunt lets go murder everyone to be released yet these eroge games dont. Just for the record, I didn't buy Manhunt and I don't buy eroge games. It's your choice what you buy, its not your choice to dictate that to other people.

That particular guy I was replying to completely butchered his paragraph, so I'd say your interpretation is as good as mine.

Fair enough, I usually butcher my paragraphs, so I guess that made perfect sense to me.

 

[geldonyetich]

Erm his point is double standards on issues that are equally severe. Murder is wrong rape is wrong, I would say they are on par. So given that why is it okay for eg manhunt lets go murder everyone to be released yet these eroge games dont. Just for the record, I didn't buy Manhunt and I don't buy eroge games. It's your choice what you buy, its not your choice to dictate that to other people.

That particular guy I was replying to completely butchered his paragraph, so I'd say your interpretation is as good as mine.

Fair enough, I usually butcher my paragraphs, so I guess that made perfect sense to me.

Apparently barely anyone had any idea what I was talking about, either. So I guess my grasp of the English language is equally tentative.

But then, this is an Internet forum, I could be the greatest writer on the planet (I'm not) and still be misinterpreted. My experience with Internet debates is that they're less an intelligent exchange of ideas and more a cream-pie throwing slapstick routine performed on an ice rink.

If I learned/remembered anything from this thread, it's just that there's no point in getting upset over how futile it is to try to communicate accurately over forums - I just come out if it looking like an arrogant twat.

 

[bad rider]

Erm his point is double standards on issues that are equally severe. Murder is wrong rape is wrong, I would say they are on par. So given that why is it okay for eg manhunt lets go murder everyone to be released yet these eroge games dont. Just for the record, I didn't buy Manhunt and I don't buy eroge games. It's your choice what you buy, its not your choice to dictate that to other people.

That particular guy I was replying to completely butchered his paragraph, so I'd say your interpretation is as good as mine.

Fair enough, I usually butcher my paragraphs, so I guess that made perfect sense to me.

Apparently barely anyone had any idea what I was talking about, either. So I guess my grasp of the English language is equally tentative.

But then, this is an Internet forum, I could be the greatest writer on the planet (I'm not) and still be misinterpreted. My experience with Internet debates is that they're less an intelligent exchange of ideas and more a cream-pie throwing slapstick routine performed on an ice rink.

If I learned/remembered anything from this thread, it's just that there's no sense getting bent out of shape over how futile it is to try to communicate accurately over forums - I just come out as an arrogant twat.

I feel odly tempted to start derailing things by typing *throws cream pie*

Just remember: The biggest arrogant twat on the internet, is the person that dosent realize he's an arrogant twat on the internet.

 

[IrrelevantTangent]

Whatever you say, O wise and ever-so-witty sensei. I could go on and on about how you keep selectively ignoring anything that I say or do that doesn't fit in with your plan to viciously attack me over and over again, but you already know that and don't seem to care.

Welcome to my ignore list. Unfortunately, you're the only person I've ever had to put on it, ever, so you may be a bit lonely. On second thought, considering your personality, I'm guessing you may be used to that.

 

[swytchblayd]

....I agree with the article. That just makes it even more creepy :|

So, what does that make all of the X-Box titles that made the 1-million-selling mark? Well, I guess I could understand the shooters (ala Halo), if they go under the contexts of hot-lead-rape. *snickers*

Seriously though, execs in Japan's porno industry are sniffing glue or something. I also picked up on the other related articles. Truly pathetic attempt at a cover-up. At least most CEOs in the USA try to smooth things over by getting rid of the evidence, not scraping more dog crap onto it XD

I think this fiasco will just make people want to look at it even more... out of partial curiosity, not completely out of perversity >.>