The Big Picture: Off Target - Don't Censor Me Part 2

[Something Amyss]

I'm sorry, but I thought that your health restored after time passing in GTA games, like it does in Saint's Row- am I wrong? If I'm wrong, I'm sorry- I haven't played GTA games in a looong time, just SR2 and 3.

Health will recover to the 50% mark on its own if you take cover or are in a vehicle. Maybe some other circumstances I'm not remembering at the moment. To get to 100%, you need to take additional action, such as eating food or visiting a prostitute (again, there may be others I'm forgetting right now). I personally think this system is kind of dumb, but I've rarely been in a situation where it's mattered much. Most of the time, I'm fine running around at half health.

My point on this was more that I do not believe this is an integral part of the game, however. I mean, I'm not even horribly bothered if they keep prostitutes in GTA. I'm not particularly bothered if you can kill them for money. But as people have been talking about the impact of removing them from the game, I'm not sure there is any.

I've personally only used prostitutes twice: once because it's one of the "misc. activities" that leads to 100%, and once because of this controversy and people claiming that it didn't/did restore health. I've done the lap dances in the game for the same reason, and I did them online to get the easy platinum award for that, and that's about the end of it. They don't seem like huge issues in and of themselves from the community, and a lot of people have commented with things like "there are still prostitutes in the games?"

I mean, maybe there's some hardcore community out there that specifically demands prostitutes and the ability to kill them. I'm just having trouble seeing it.

Maybe just remove that mechanic about prostitutes healing the character after paid for services, but to maintain the gritty feel, leave prostitutes in, along with the criminals and whatnot. Personally, I found including prostitutes in the Saint's Row games (specifically SR2) to be awkward- rather, the "mini-games" that involved them.

SR has basically phased out prostitutes, unless I've missed some in IV. And people didn't particularly miss it, either.

As to the Target petition, if they want to be seen as a more family-oriented store, then it's probably a good move to take it off the shelves, I reckon. And they should probably have a look at some other games and media while they're at it. I mean, there are still places where adults can buy these mature-themed products, right?

There is. They're not going to look at other games, however, because this is about putting forth the least effort possible to preserve the most money. GTA V is only a issue because they're concerned about lost sales in other, likely more lucrative areas (especially since games notoriously have a poor markup for retailers).

So there are no hookers in a gritty realistic bent world? Perhaps realism is not right word "contemporary" maybe?

I'm not sure contemporary is the right word, since hookers seem to be more a throwback than anything else.

A while back, while people were arguing that the inability to kill children ruined their immersion in Skyrim, Yahtzee did an Extra Punctuation on shock and included lines questioning this in another context:

What if Skyrim had standard controls for making love to people? Say, left click to deploy a bunch of flowers, right click to stick it in. Would you mod the game to allow players to also fuck children? Not because you want to, you understand, but just for the sake of realism. When you set out to seduce every single person in a town you don't feel properly fulfilled unless the neighbourhood kids have also been ticked

And I think this is kind of an important thing here. People complain about realism and immersion, but child prostitution and slavery are real issues in this country, and you don't see it happen. Animal abuse is super common, and I think you'd see a lot of people upset if you could buy a dog and then beat the shit out of it (I'm sure there are already some people bothered that you can kill wolves and the like). Does the game feel any less complete because you can't fiddle kids or beat on Fido? Would they complete the game? Why, then, does prostitution? What does it even add to the game?

 

[darthdenim]

So GTA IS satire now?

Didn't Bob do a whole video on how GTA ISN'T a satire?

 

[El_Ganso]

Really Bob? you start your video and go straight to a Fallacy of Relative Privation and expect to be taken seriously?

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation)

Everyone would be better off watching TotalBiscuit's video on this issue and see why he is still on the side of Consumer Rights.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

The problem with changing the whole sex worker thing is you either remove them or make them like the kids in fallout/skyrim IE unkillable. Neither is quite realistic....

Also, and I can't stress this enough, prostitutes actually exist in the real world and are no less deserving of representation than any of the other criminal elements in the game. In fact, prostitution is actually legal in at least one state in the US. Just because some people have a repressed sense of sexuality doesn't mean we should impose our morals on those who don't.

So... where's the beef?

The crazies who want females out of the game because its violent.

Do they realize that there are actually no males or females or humans at all in the games? That these are a compilation of 1's and 0's with no feelings or emotions beyond what is programmed? Even if they reached a level of artificial intelligence it still wouldn't be a gendered issue beyond a sentient being issue at which point I would be on board with not subjecting a real sentient being to a violent environment unnecessarily.

That anyone would honestly try to protect the rights of digital objects just speaks volumes of the incredible skill of developers and writers in personifying objects.

There is also an issue with perception and acceptance of morals influenced by fiction. While I can agree to that to a point you are right that we are defaming people for what they do in a fictional setting, its silly......

So there are no hookers in a gritty realistic bent world? Perhaps realism is not right word "contemporary" maybe?

I'm not sure contemporary is the right word, since hookers seem to be more a throwback than anything else.

A while back, while people were arguing that the inability to kill children ruined their immersion in Skyrim, Yahtzee did an Extra Punctuation on shock and included lines questioning this in another context:

What if Skyrim had standard controls for making love to people? Say, left click to deploy a bunch of flowers, right click to stick it in. Would you mod the game to allow players to also fuck children? Not because you want to, you understand, but just for the sake of realism. When you set out to seduce every single person in a town you don't feel properly fulfilled unless the neighbourhood kids have also been ticked

And I think this is kind of an important thing here. People complain about realism and immersion, but child prostitution and slavery are real issues in this country, and you don't see it happen. Animal abuse is super common, and I think you'd see a lot of people upset if you could buy a dog and then beat the shit out of it (I'm sure there are already some people bothered that you can kill wolves and the like). Does the game feel any less complete because you can't fiddle kids or beat on Fido? Would they complete the game? Why, then, does prostitution? What does it even add to the game?

Its called story telling, immersion and fantasy. Not everyone likes a vanilla world with little moral contrast, if you do not like touchy subjects then perhaps you should stick with E rated games..

There is going to be slavery and prostitution no matter what age we live in, unless we get rid of greed and even then you'll still have sex practitioners as it is kinda a skill/art form. So meh in a average big city the dark side will have it tho it depends on how you focus on it, for GTA it fits for FO it fits for any game that touches the dark side humanity it can fit depending on the story..


I think you could get away with alluding to child rape/abuse in FO/TES and I think to an extent FO3 had it(FO2 defiantly had it). Tho being very graphic about it is about as begin very graphic with sex will not fly with the majority. Also people modded kids to heck and back in the TES/FO games so unless they are hard coded it will be unlocked and used as any other asset.

 

[Something Amyss]

Its called story telling, immersion and fantasy. Not everyone likes a vanilla world with little moral contrast, if you do not like touchy subjects then perhaps you should stick with E rated games..

I already addressed that line of talking. Must you be so dishonest as to then suggest that?

As a followup, though, why are you not demanding games where you can screw kids?

I think you could get away with alluding to child rape/abuse in FO/TES and I think to an extent FO3 had it(FO2 defiantly had it). Tho being very graphic about it is about as begin very graphic with sex will not fly with the majority. Also people modded kids to heck and back in the TES/FO games so unless they are hard coded it will be unlocked and used as any other asset.

B-b-b-but immersion, storytelling, and fantasy! Not everyone likes a vanilla world with little moral contrast!

Except that wasn't relevant to my point in the first place, but hey. You brought it up, so it seems fair that you should answer to it yourself.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Its called story telling, immersion and fantasy. Not everyone likes a vanilla world with little moral contrast, if you do not like touchy subjects then perhaps you should stick with E rated games..

I already addressed that line of talking. Must you be so dishonest as to then suggest that?

As a followup, though, why are you not demanding games where you can screw kids?

Because your not mature enough to handle it dose not mean it must be banned for everyone.

Kids<Minors, from all the RPGs(mid/late 90s) I have played none really dealt with kid(under 14ish) sexual abuse but teenagers ya they had a few instances of that, not directly mind you but cases of abuse the player can avenge or condone by not laying waste to aggressor, tho you can get away more with stuff with sprites than 3d rendered models ala the Bioshock and the immortal children of FO/TES, if anything its funny watching a dragon unable to kill a kid then get focused on the kid letting me scramble outta there tho I tend to play a no civilian/ally AI death game, eve did it in the first few halos and bullet witch, made the games a bit harder but also more satisfying the immortal were an annoyance because you can not save that witch can not be killed, hell I was ready for Bioshock since everyone thought the kids would be killable thus you had to work at saving them since the Big Daddy fights could easily kill them by cross fire. Of course they had to make them immortal because the rare sicko might get their rocks off on it of which such logic is disingenuous at best.

B-b-b-but immersion, storytelling, and fantasy! Not everyone likes a vanilla world with little moral contrast!

Except that wasn't relevant to my point in the first place, but hey. You brought it up, so it seems fair that you should answer to it yourself.

It all depends on what they can get away with, nothing much will change GTA as far as hookers, blow and mindless killing goes.

As for your question you can see it as a negative to never be used and have it banned with other content you do not like (so others can ban the rest of fiction because they do not like it)or leave it up to the creator and or consumer.


I am sure you will complain about it as you want a direct answer to what it adds, what it adds is what emotion the creator of the content wants to paint. Dose not matter what they want to paint ,tho I think realistic fake child porn is illegal since Clinton, anything besides that can be sold at which point and time its up to the market to buy it or not its also up to the market to be bullied by the vocal minority. Either way when it comes to humanity banning fiction on the grounds of moral superiority only leads to mindless book burning because the system then has the power over the market and the ignorant if not malicious vocal minority is in control.

 

[Something Amyss]

Because your not mature enough to handle it dose not mean it must be banned for everyone.

Again, I'm not sure what saying the exact opposite of my claims and attributing them to me accomplishes.

It all depends on what they can get away with, nothing much will change GTA as far as hookers, blow and mindless killing goes.

Now you're changing your story. It's not about immersion, fantasy, or storytelling in that case.

I am sure you will complain about it as you want a direct answer to what it adds

I gave up expecting anything honest from you a while back. You're making an ad hoc argument because your original claim was so full of holes you could use it as a strainer. And you seem to know that, because you've constantly wriggled away from it.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Because your not mature enough to handle it dose not mean it must be banned for everyone.

Again, I'm not sure what saying the exact opposite of my claims and attributing them to me accomplishes.

It all depends on what they can get away with, nothing much will change GTA as far as hookers, blow and mindless killing goes.

Now you're changing your story. It's not about immersion, fantasy, or storytelling in that case.

I am sure you will complain about it as you want a direct answer to what it adds

I gave up expecting anything honest from you a while back. You're making an ad hoc argument because your original claim was so full of holes you could use it as a strainer. And you seem to know that, because you've constantly wriggled away from it.

Ah yes pot calling kettle argument how nice. I like reiteration anyway sometimes it comes out as non-gibberish even dumb people can understand every now and then, so let me reiterate..

--

I am poorly arguing that banning thought/fiction is a slippery slope, you seem to have an issue with some fantasy being too evil/risque/stupid. Then if so the only action you can take is claiming the moral high ground while defaming others and or inciting the ban that thought/fiction. Tell me why do you care what living people do to fictional characters??

--

It is about Immersion/fantasy,ect on the consumer end on the creator end, no on the seller end its what they can get away with in the medium they have chosen to use. Books get away with it all the time, film dose too, anything newer than 1930 not so much.

--

I told you what I got out of it, its rather satisfying to save people fictional or otherwise. In real world mimicking setups, fantasy based or other wise, not having children or making them immortal is rather silly, tho I suppose it keeps those with no foresight and malicious intent from exclaiming you can murder children in something where you can murder everything.

 

[Something Amyss]

[
you seem to have an issue with some fantasy being too evil/risque/stupid.

Only if you don't mind misrepresenting me. In fact, in one of the previous posts in which I quoted you, I said the opposite. You have to have not read my posts to come to this conclusion or be willing to make up your claim despite evidence to the contrary.

Tell me why do you care what living people do to fictional characters??

How do you even ask that question when you're making excuses for why sex with children in video games is different? Clearly, you have some standards and lines you won't cross, but instead of being honest you keep telling me that I'm the one who can't handle content. Even though I've previously said I don't care if prostitutes are in the game. I just object to the ridiculous notion of "realism" or "immersion." And now that you've brought it up, the inanity of the "slippery slope."

 

[Dizchu]

And I think this is kind of an important thing here. People complain about realism and immersion, but child prostitution and slavery are real issues in this country, and you don't see it happen. Animal abuse is super common, and I think you'd see a lot of people upset if you could buy a dog and then beat the shit out of it (I'm sure there are already some people bothered that you can kill wolves and the like). Does the game feel any less complete because you can't fiddle kids or beat on Fido? Would they complete the game? Why, then, does prostitution? What does it even add to the game?

I think the distinction here is that the depiction of child prostitution would be illegal. That kind of thing would literally get GTA V banned.

Now I agree with you that having sex workers in GTA doesn't add anything to the experience and their removal would probably be beneficial more than anything. I mean if people wanted to bang sex workers in GTA so desperately they'd wait for the PC version to come out and create a mod that facilitates it.

However what I am not comfortable with is the idea that killing a sex worker is more "severe" than killing anyone else. I mean with all the Ferguson, #ICantBreathe stuff going on at the moment killing black people would also be considered extremely insensitive given the current climate of police brutality in the states? You can literally get in a police car and run black people down with it. Should black people be taken out of the game? Does it encourage violence towards ethnic minorities?

 

[Something Amyss]

I think the distinction here is that the depiction of child prostitution would be illegal. That kind of thing would literally get GTA V banned.

Not in the states. We have had movies and TV shows which depict it.

The rest I won't address because you're arguing against things I'm not saying and I'm really, really tired of doing this. I'm honestly not sure why I haven't just ignored you at this point.

But since this is the second person mischaracterising me in a row, let me go back to my thesis statement.

My point on this was more that I do not believe this is an integral part of the game, however. I mean, I'm not even horribly bothered if they keep prostitutes in GTA. I'm not particularly bothered if you can kill them for money. But as people have been talking about the impact of removing them from the game, I'm not sure there is any.

Note that I specifically said I don't care if they're in the game or if you can kill them (for money). Like, seriously. I don't know how to make that point clearer.

 

[Dizchu]

Note that I specifically said I don't care if they're in the game or if you can kill them (for money). Like, seriously. I don't know how to make that point clearer.

I wasn't assuming that you were necessarily supporting the withdrawal of the game from Australian stores. I know what your point of view is and mine is roughly the same. I was just trying to give the point of view that you were arguing against some clarity.

Maybe I shouldn't have stepped in. These discussions never exactly end well.[footnote]Or more accurately, these discussions never exactly end[/footnote]

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Only if you don't mind misrepresenting me. In fact, in one of the previous posts in which I quoted you, I said the opposite. You have to have not read my posts to come to this conclusion or be willing to make up your claim despite evidence to the contrary.

In which one? I'm bad about skimming. ><

How do you even ask that question when you're making excuses for why sex with children in video games is different? Clearly, you have some standards and lines you won't cross, but instead of being honest you keep telling me that I'm the one who can't handle content. Even though I've previously said I don't care if prostitutes are in the game. I just object to the ridiculous notion of "realism" or "immersion." And now that you've brought it up, the inanity of the "slippery slope."

We all have standards and lines we do not cross yet we are all different and those standards and lines are different, different things add and take away to a persons experience in fiction.

You have me a bit confused. I am seeing things on 3 levels content creator ,content seller and content consumer.


On the content creator level anything CAN be made (albeit for the illegal stuff obviously) but it dose not always mean you always get extremes(like Pron in general, GTA the games or SAW the films or Urotsukid&#333;ji).


On the content seller level things partly limited to what the average content consumer wants and what the content seller can sell without getting harassed for it, for the most part not having sex(as in porn), kids and sex, kids and abuse.


On the content consumer level anything CAN be bought(albeit for the illegal stuff obviously) but it dose not always mean you always get extremes(like Pron in general, GTA the games or SAW the films or Urotsukid&#333;ji).


Where am I conflicted when these are the realities of the times?

 

[Something Amyss]

In which one? I'm bad about skimming. ><

But since this is the second person mischaracterising me in a row, let me go back to my thesis statement.

My point on this was more that I do not believe this is an integral part of the game, however. I mean, I'm not even horribly bothered if they keep prostitutes in GTA. I'm not particularly bothered if you can kill them for money. But as people have been talking about the impact of removing them from the game, I'm not sure there is any.

Note that I specifically said I don't care if they're in the game or if you can kill them (for money). Like, seriously. I don't know how to make that point clearer.

We all have standards and lines we do not cross yet we are all different and those standards and lines are different, different things add and take away to a persons experience in fiction.

Yet you're using this as an excuse to try and make this about my personal morality. When it doesn't even fit with my espoused beliefs.

On the content seller level things partly limited to what the average content consumer wants and what the content seller can sell without getting harassed for it, for the most part not having sex(as in porn), kids and sex, kids and abuse.

So what does this have to do with realism? It sounds like if there is consumer outrage at prostitution, which there is, you should actually be defending their side of it. People are drawing a line on acceptable content. In fact, by this logic, shouldn't you embrace that slippery slope?

 

[MB202]

It's funny, I literally just saw someone on Facebook outcrying over this, but I pretty much reacted the same way Bob did; a retailer (ONLY one retailer) is not selling a year-old game ONLY in Australia... I also quote Yahtzee, in that Australia likes to piggy-back on policies that come from ACTUAL countries (the US and the UK). The guy said there'd be a domino affect, but honestly... Not really... At least, I don't see it happening anytime soon. In the end, the more rational and clear-minded people will know what's right.

 

[Magmarock]

It's self cencership Bob. People aren't angry because Target removed a game that wasn't kid friendly. They are angry because Target allowed themselves to be bullied by SJW's. Australia, is kind of overrun with SJW's and people over here are sick to death of it. The overzealous feminists here are starting to prove that they are a threat to some very real rights. If you want a more practical example. Witcher 2 was censored. upon it's first release with two sex scenes removed from the game. This wasn't because they were too graphic, it was because you received them as payment for a quest. Feminist logic right there.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

snip

Yet you're using this as an excuse to try and make this about my personal morality. When it doesn't even fit with my espoused beliefs.

That would probably be due to not reiterating the "I(as in you) do not care" line and focusing on my mistaken assumption you care. My bad.

So what does this have to do with realism?

It goes to the root of realism in fiction, just how real can it be until you hit a point of diminishing returns.

It sounds like if there is consumer outrage at prostitution, which there is, you should actually be defending their side of it. People are drawing a line on acceptable content. In fact, by this logic, shouldn't you embrace that slippery slope?

Not really as the vocal minority tends to be chaotic, malicious and short sighted.(gamergate reference redacted LOL)

I mean its great and all that people can ban together to get a corporation to remove an old product, it would be even okay for them to do it with a new product. However after a certain point and time you reach a point of things being removed because any small group of crazies can have anything removed.
-
-
I'd rather people learn to live with things that offend them rather than give alot of power to small groups of crazy people.

 

[Something Amyss]

That would probably be due to not reiterating the "I(as in you) do not care" line and focusing on my mistaken assumption you care. My bad.

I've said repeatedly that this was not how I felt. You continued to insist it, even as you indicated I was dumb for needing your reiteration.

That's not just your bad.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

That would probably be due to not reiterating the "I(as in you) do not care" line and focusing on my mistaken assumption you care. My bad.

I've said repeatedly that this was not how I felt. You continued to insist it, even as you indicated I was dumb for needing your reiteration.

That's not just your bad.

No you see I was mistaking you caring about you being misquoted for you caring about whats in fiction.
You are right I did misquote you then went on a dumb tangent. LOL