Well, in that case, I'm calling bullshit on you. Your position requires just as many facts as mine does. Either way, it's irrelevant, because Target already did what they chose to do, but that was pretty classless to say what you just did.Zachary Amaranth said:The difference being that my position doesn't require any facts. My position is that you lack the facts to make your determination, therefore the only "fact" I need is that you lack facts. This is a point we agree on.Signa said:If you want to debate on the financial point, go ahead, but neither you or I actually have any facts to back anything up.
Well the voices do like singing Sabaton and Amon Amarth a little too enthusiastically. Sometimes though they like to sing Justin Bieber in an even worse auto-tune than that little ... himself can. Let's just say that thats's what happens when people second guess them. It hurts. A lot. OH god ...Zachary Amaranth said:How dare you have a consistent opinion that I can't now mischaracterise you with?Haerthan said:Thou dost know what I like about my madness? The coherency. For example, I hate EA and Uplay. Thus far I do not have more than 3 games that use Uplay and NO EA games. Private companies should serve the customers regardless of the ideology. There happy my blaspheming brother? Now please stop second-guessing the voices inside my head. They get very cross when people second-guess them.
It's especially funny that several of the people who are against this are for a certain other consumer movement. Perhaps it's projection?
Also, do the voices in your head sing in tune?
There's sugar cookie flavored coffee creamer. My fav for this time of year.Haerthan said:Cookie chakras, cookie pans, cookie swords, cookie staves, I'm good with everything made cookies. FOR I AM THE KING OF COOKIES. THOU SHALT BOW DOWN TO ME. And give me cookiesRaikuFA said:If you're the king of cookies then your weapon should be cookie chakras.Haerthan said:Thou hast earned thyself a cookie. And my friendship and my bow/axe/sword/whatever implement of death im carrying at a time/ in our next adventure. For I am the King of Cookies. Together we shall bring enlightenment to the masses of the internet. Or kill them trying. Whichever fits our pique of madness i guess. See thee on the battlefield brother/sister.Zhukov said:OMG, IT'S CENSORSH...
No, hang on, it's a business responding to customer feedback and choosing not to sell a specific product that is still freely available to anyone who wishes to buy it.
"We are your customers, listen to our feedback! Hear our voices! Obey our comm... whoa, whoa, don't listen to those customers, they're feminazi SJW marxists!"
Heh. I love you all. I really do.
Captcha: coffee mug. No thanks Captcha. I don't drink coffee. And cookies with coffee? Blapshemy. Prepare thyself for a fiery death blasphemer. Now I just gotta find a flamethrower. Maybe the dead Russians in my backyard might know something.
Because at the end of the day it's Target's choice, they are not required to follow the petition. As a result their choice to pull the game is firmly in their hands and they are responsible.WeepingAngels said:Target didn't do it on their own. Why don't you blame the petition?
RaikuFA said:There's sugar cookie flavored coffee creamer. My fav for this time of year.Haerthan said:Cookie chakras, cookie pans, cookie swords, cookie staves, I'm good with everything made cookies. FOR I AM THE KING OF COOKIES. THOU SHALT BOW DOWN TO ME. And give me cookiesRaikuFA said:If you're the king of cookies then your weapon should be cookie chakras.Haerthan said:Thou hast earned thyself a cookie. And my friendship and my bow/axe/sword/whatever implement of death im carrying at a time/ in our next adventure. For I am the King of Cookies. Together we shall bring enlightenment to the masses of the internet. Or kill them trying. Whichever fits our pique of madness i guess. See thee on the battlefield brother/sister.Zhukov said:OMG, IT'S CENSORSH...
No, hang on, it's a business responding to customer feedback and choosing not to sell a specific product that is still freely available to anyone who wishes to buy it.
"We are your customers, listen to our feedback! Hear our voices! Obey our comm... whoa, whoa, don't listen to those customers, they're feminazi SJW marxists!"
Heh. I love you all. I really do.
Captcha: coffee mug. No thanks Captcha. I don't drink coffee. And cookies with coffee? Blapshemy. Prepare thyself for a fiery death blasphemer. Now I just gotta find a flamethrower. Maybe the dead Russians in my backyard might know something.
Would they have pulled it without the petition?RicoADF said:Because at the end of the day it's Target's choice, they are not required to follow the petition. As a result their choice to pull the game is firmly in their hands and they are responsible.WeepingAngels said:Target didn't do it on their own. Why don't you blame the petition?
This is a lie. Actually it's multiple lies, but it is almost wholly dishonest. First off allowing =/= encouraging as unless you are careful when you kill a prostitute you are penalized with a police star, also the prostitutes are a very small part of the game, hardly the incentive for someone to go out and buy it. Also at no point in the game do you commit sexual violence on women, let alone have it be required to proceed. just about the only honest part of this statement is Target was promoting it for XmasIt's a game that encourages players to murder women for entertainment. The incentive is to commit sexual violence against women, then abuse or kill them to proceed or get 'health' points ? and now Target are stocking it and promoting it for your Xmas stocking.
first off the sex is, again, an incredibly small portion of the game, by no means are they what 'this game means'. Also they fail to point out the player does have the option to just let the prostitute walk away and keep the moneyThis is Grand Theft Auto 5. This game means that after various sex acts, players are given options to kill women by punching her unconscious, killing with a machete, bat or guns to get their money returned.
as well as many comments on the petition arguing that the game should be banned from australia, is anything to go by they don't intend to stop with Target, they want to make sure this game isn't sold at all in the countryThis would also set an example to other stockists of GTA V.
Women can "just ignore" the game itself, but they can't "just ignore" a society where murdering disadvantaged women is considered a fun minigame in a major release.mxc2012 said:I don't know why these people can't just ignore it. If they hate it that much just don't buy it and don't play it. stop trying to ruin everyone elses fun.
Except if there were individuals being raped and murdered every day with salami, I probably *would* support your effort remove a salami-slaughter minigame in a popular release.madster11 said:Know what i don't like?
Salami.
I'm gonna make a petiton claiming to be a female survivor of salami-based abuse and demand woolworths and coles stop selling it.
Wow, way to be intellectually disingenuous. It's not a "fun minigame". You don't get rewarded by the game, it's not even encouraged. This is like saying running over pedestrians in your car is a "fun minigame" in GTA V.peruvianskys said:Women can "just ignore" the game itself, but they can't "just ignore" a society where murdering disadvantaged women is considered a fun minigame in a major release.mxc2012 said:I don't know why these people can't just ignore it. If they hate it that much just don't buy it and don't play it. stop trying to ruin everyone elses fun.
It's a privilege to be able to think that you can just turn your head and ignore simulations of violence against you.
If it's such a minor point then, why are you so upset that it will be removed?Ilovechocolatemilk said:Wow, way to be intellectually disingenuous. It's not a "fun minigame". You don't get rewarded by the game, it's not even encouraged. This is like saying running over pedestrians in your car is a "fun minigame" in GTA V.
Now, if you were against the torture scene, you might have a point. But these claims hold no water.
This is like saying, "We're going to pressure Barnes and Noble to ban A Clockwork Orange until Anthony Burgess removes the violent rape scene in it."peruvianskys said:If it's such a minor point then, why are you so upset that it will be removed?Ilovechocolatemilk said:Wow, way to be intellectually disingenuous. It's not a "fun minigame". You don't get rewarded by the game, it's not even encouraged. This is like saying running over pedestrians in your car is a "fun minigame" in GTA V.
Now, if you were against the torture scene, you might have a point. But these claims hold no water.
Either it's a huge part of the game, in which case that's even more reason to remove it...
Or it's a very small part of the game, in which case there's no reason to keep it.
Pick one or the other.
I don't call myself a liberal (eww) and this is not censorship. It would be censorship to demand that the game be made illegal. This is just a company responding to the demands of its customers - you know, what everyone here claims to want so badly.Ilovechocolatemilk said:This is like saying, "We're going to pressure Barnes and Noble to ban A Clockwork Orange until Anthony Burgess removes the violent rape scene in it."
No.
All censorship is bad. You cannot call yourself a liberal and simultaneously believe in censorship.
And we're here to tell that company it's a bad decision. We're customers too, just like you.peruvianskys said:I don't call myself a liberal (eww) and this is not censorship. It would be censorship to demand that the game be made illegal. This is just a company responding to the demands of its customers - you know, what everyone here claims to want so badly.Ilovechocolatemilk said:This is like saying, "We're going to pressure Barnes and Noble to ban A Clockwork Orange until Anthony Burgess removes the violent rape scene in it."
No.
All censorship is bad. You cannot call yourself a liberal and simultaneously believe in censorship.
They won't side against the feminists. They go so far as to pretend that the petition is irrelevant and ONLY Target is to blame.Robert Marrs said:If you really don't have a problem with a group of people actively misrepresenting media in order to prevent other people from having it I am not sure what to say. Sure only Target decided to pull the game and they are within their rights to do so. A private company made a decision for their private company. Not really an issue. The issue is people are trying to prevent you from having things because they don't like it. It is no different then far right religious groups trying to prevent you from getting a video game based on its content and I fucking guarantee if that was the case the naysayers in this thread would be flipping out. Glad to see hypocrisy its still a virtue among so many of the escapist users.
Yes, and they chose not to listen to you. If you don't like it when companies ignore your requests and demands, try being someone who cares about women in this industry and watch it happen over and over. Sucks, doesn't it?Ilovechocolatemilk said:And we're here to tell that company it's a bad decision. We're customers too, just like you.
And I have no problem with bookstores choosing not to hold anti-woman bullshit on their shelves.Do you know how they censor books? Moral authorities pressure private companies to pull the books from their shelves. Very rarely are laws passed to make a book illegal because once it gets to court, it usually favors the author, not the angry mob trying to get companies to pull it.
Let's get something straight - Puritans *loved* violence against women. They were really big on it. This has nothing to do with puritanism. It has everything to do with women demanding that depictions of their abuse and their degradation are not sold to men as entertainment.This is no different. And the fact you're not a liberal proves what I've been saying about sjw's all along-- they're neo-puritans, not liberals interested in social justice.