This isn't about censorship or the sacredness of knowledge. When you can understand this, we'll talk.Krakyn said:
Japanese Eroge Company Renames Rape Games to "Platinum Games"
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
You can disbelieve it all you like, the dude's still going to the clink for up to 12 years.GenHellspawn said:
I just signed up to post in this thread, mostly because the sheer hypocrisy emanating from this thread as gamers cry out for the banning of games is causing me endless rage and hilarity at the same time.
Do your self a favor and don't concern your self with matters outside of your country and culture, you'll only make your self look like an ass.
Do your self a favor and don't concern your self with matters outside of your country and culture, you'll only make your self look like an ass.
This has absolutely nothing to do with my previous statement. Would you mind paying attention to other people's arguments for a change?geldonyetich said:
Okay.Krakyn said:
The law agrees with me [http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/manga-porn/] and so you apparently have no idea what you're talking about.
Done.
Actually, it has to do with my undermining your base premise, because it clashes broadly with reality. However, if you really want to operate with a flawed based premise, by all means go ahead. You'll just be wrong.GenHellspawn said:
So basically, the only way you have of justifying your beliefs is because a higher power has ordered you to, and everybody else is wrong because you say so.geldonyetich said:
This confuses me. Why join an internet forum where people share ideas, and then oppose the sharing of ideas because you don't like them?
A swing and a miss.GenHellspawn said:
It's interesting how we tend to define our own purpose for message boards, isn't it? It's not like it explicitly states what they're for other than "discussion."
In any case, this also was a false assumption.
whaa??... sorry but you just sounded A LOT like Jako, come on, "Rape Simulator"?? haha, its a game, yeah, a sick game at that, a game i would never buy but in my oppinion you are falling in the same misconception that a "game" can replicate exact situations and can be used by people to "train" in such situations, so it´s ok to have a game where you cut in halve people with a chainsaw (ok, humanoids) or war simmulators, but get into sex and its a "no no"?The_Oracle said:
i never understood why people are so outraged at this kind of things... to each his own i say, but never say a "game" is the same as actually performing the act.
Yeah, but I don't agree with the law. Do you agree that all games that can't get a rating in Australia should be banned?geldonyetich said:
Every comment on that page you linked to completely disagrees with the conviction. I believe that's because people like you on moral crusades created the problem, just like you're doing now. That guy had never hurt anybody in his life, no child was ever harmed because of his purchase of magazines, yet he was imprisoned.
If you're going to parrot me, you could at least try to make the sentence structure sensical.Shogoll said:
Too...many...flames...
I'm leaving this thread now before something gets said that shouldn't be said, and the banhammer comes down on all of us. I never thought I'd be flamed like this for expressing my opinion.
I'm leaving this thread now before something gets said that shouldn't be said, and the banhammer comes down on all of us. I never thought I'd be flamed like this for expressing my opinion.
I've been just lurking through this conversation reading everything, but that statement deserves a response. Why do you think there are repeals and questions of constitutionality in the laws? Chances are that in a few months that man will be out of jail, and the law that sentenced him will be repealed for being unconstitutional and against freedom of speech. And making a statement like that basically says that you can't look outside of the box.geldonyetich said:
Honestly I would prefer that none of the games get banned because its only the beginning of more bans. Manhunt was banned in many countries for being to violent, and the sequel was censored in the US because it was to graphical.
Would you rather have the next modern warfare 2 game banned because it simulates terrorist activities? Or at least the older of the soldier of fortune games that showed guts spilling out of stomachs when they were shot because its graphical? Where would you draw the line of censorship?
He/She doesn't want to do that because then he/she'd have to accept that he/she is totally and utterly wrong. He/She wants to take the moral high ground and lecture everyone else from a position of vaunted intellectual superiority where he/she can bat away every logical affront to his/her terrible reasoning as "You just don't have enough X to understand why you're wrong". It's pretty pathetic really.GenHellspawn said:
You were not flamed for expressing your opinion, you were flamed for expressing a contentious opinion which you defended with morally superior statements. Had you dealt with the rebuttals to your statements in a logical, cool-minded manner you wouldn't have been flamed. Please don't play the martyr.The_Oracle said:
weeeell, i dont want to brag but i do kind of know my way with the ladies hahahaKrakyn said:
yes, i agree completely with your post, its just a GAME, a 3d game with realistic settings and emotions but still just a game, try to ban one of the "Sades" books (Marques de Sade) they are just the same, but they are books, i have read a lot of them and the sittuations placed in those books are quite horrendous... still i am married and have a kid and i have never done anything like those books say, now a game is basically the same, a means to entertain yourselve, it doesnt mean people will end up "rapists" as much as they end up being "serial killers" by playing manhunt or GTA.
I believe the problem is the fellow didn't understand what he was getting himself into.Krakyn said:
What I've actually been arguing here is this: the Internet proclaims everything is about the free exchange of ideas, and that's just awesome. However, outside of the Internet, there is a definite prevalence of social mores and laws which the users of the Internet may not be aware of.
You might think that Lolicon is cool because nobody real is being harmed in it. However, the real issue is deeper than that: You, yourself, are not the authority that determines whether this is an acceptable within your society. If you are, hey, it's really easy to get away with anything because you deemed it acceptable. No, it doesn't work that way, sorry.
This entire forum could agree with you, but it's pointless, because the context in which I'm operating here is an Internet forum. Frankly, that some of the people who are agreeing with you have 4Chan inspired avatars is pretty telling. An an argument, it's an impossible one for me to show a dominant agreement with because, by and large, I've chosen a very poor place to operate upon: I'm amongst those who live on the Internet, I can't get them to agree with reality's real priorities are truly more important. So, instead, I refuse to argue.
Simply know this: there are plenty of examples you can find, right now, in Google where people possessing something like RapeLay can actually get convicted for it to be in their possession. You might think it's okay because you played the game, but you were actually at risk. I'm not going to bother to argue the right or wrong of it because, like you, I, too, am not an authority that determines whether or not this is an acceptable activity within our society.
So, basically speaking, this debate you and that other guy have been trying to spark with me? Pointless. Neither of us will accomplish anything on this thread, so why bother. Instead, just open your eyes and know that it is, in fact, illegal right now. If you don't like it, go talk to a lawyer.
geldonyetich said:
Perhaps, he is wrong because his base premise clashes broadly with reality, and as a result of his desire to continue operating with a flawed base premise, he is wrong. Two subordinate clauses with a single main clause. The structure was just fine, maybe you just don't understand it. I laid it out more simply for you, hope that helps.Shogoll said:
Put another way, the other day, I was checking out a Manga Fox forum on a comic about incest. There were a number of threads going on about how okay incest really is. Guess which side would appear to be winning? That's right, if popularity on an Internet forum is all you really need to determine right from wrong, we should all be boinking our sisters right now.