TheBaronOfNA
Banned
Oh yeah, believe me... Spanish can be a bitch even if you are a born speaker. Good look with graphic accents.
Will discussion of certain games be banned on Neogaf from here on out?
- Thread starter El Sloth
- Start date
- Status
Oh yeah, believe me... Spanish can be a bitch even if you are a born speaker. Good look with graphic accents.
Yeah, this one threw me off too for a minute - "triteness" wasn't referring to your post or bishoptl's. Glittering Crux said GAF didn't allow niche titles and MormaPope used bishoptl's response to your post as an example of how a niche post would be allowed. (check the bolded lines)
You're right.
Children with developing brains and not able to conduct full thought should just be able to be exposed to all of this. There should be no ratings out there to help kids or those who don't want to be experienced to material.
It should be like a roll of the dice.
You see an anime girl and it could either be a fun family-friendly game about puzzles, or it could be a rape simulator, (not referring to this game in particular). There should be complete anarchy as you said!
Do people really think this?
ShockingAlberto
Member
Then art is so broad as to be basically meaningless.
Not at all. I'd be fine with far worse than that existing.
...I wouldn't buy it, mind you! But I'd be totally cool with selling it, discussing it, and debating it.
If there were lines in art that one should never cross, then art would no longer mean a damned thing.
-Tom
That's the point. Welcome to art.
Art is simply the act of creation.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
That you take such a detached view is a bit unsettling actually. The whole underlying meaning to art is how it both reflects and effects reality in a relationship of synthesis.
I haven't played the game but from what people are describing it sounds exactly like pornography; others are claiming it's all part of the artistic process.
I mean, Shawshank Redemption wouldn't be less of a movie if there were censored scenes of Andy being sodomized over and over again (Which was part of the movie's narrative and a commentary on prison conditions). The movie doesn't have to show us that, we infer it.
Movies, books and other forms of media have all tackled sobering, taboo and unethical concepts without just showing a bunch of pornography thinly veiled as 'art'.
How about the game Rule Of Rose? It seems to tackle the same issues people in this thread are discussing without having us stroke a childs rude parts.
I mean, Shawshank Redemption wouldn't be less of a movie if there were censored scenes of Andy being sodomized over and over again (Which was part of the movie's narrative and a commentary on prison conditions). The movie doesn't have to show us that, we infer it.
Movies, books and other forms of media have all tackled sobering, taboo and unethical concepts without just showing a bunch of pornography thinly veiled as 'art'.
How about the game Rule Of Rose? It seems to tackle the same issues people in this thread are discussing without having us stroke a childs rude parts.
Chet Rippo
Member
No such thing.
And the now the thread just went creepy, like most of animegaf threads.
OrlanisWorks
Banned
That's been under constant debate for a long, long time.
Is natural beauty any less beautiful because it's all around us? Does water quench thirst any less because it's so plentiful?
Just because something is utterly ubiquitous doesn't make it meaningless. If anything, that makes it mean the world all the more.
-Tom
Many, including the supreme court of the united states, sees a distinction between pornography and art. What isn't defined is where that distinction exists, and that is a subjective measure inherent to society and the individual.
This "Everything is art!" sentiment can be disingenuous. The argument about this game not being art is rooted in the idea that it has little redeeming value. It doesn't inspire discussion beyond "that's so sick" or "omg so hawt." There is no deeper message being conveyed. It's visual and sexual gluttony for a market most would see fit to let starve.
Because no argument is complete without a slippery slope - a guy slicing another person to death in the middle of the street (let's just say with consent from the man he killed for the sake of terrible hypotheticals) calls it art. Is it art? Maybe, to some. Is it a valid form of expression that shouldn't be curtailed? Nope.
EDIT: Also, this might not be fair, but I feel the urge to point it out - you really shouldn't have pointed out you worked for XSeed in a previous post. I know you said you speak for yourself, not your company, but I was oblivious as to where you worked before you brought it to my attention, even if it's in your tag. As such, I can't help but think less of XSeed for employing someone who would defend the right for this kind of trash to exist, all in the name of artistic expression.
I have zero problems with topics on this game being banned. It's creepy to me, but I'm fine with other people playing it -- to each their own.
However, what irritates me to no end is this concept that teens, even early teens, are somehow filled with the "innocence of youth." Bullshit.
I've worked with kids -- a lot of kids, 12 to 18 ... that innocence thing is a load of malarkey. You can't impose innocence on people. For the vast majority of human history, people were getting married the moment they went through puberty. This whole suddenly someone is 18 and then they're an adult thing is totally a social construct ... it's arbitrary, random, and creates a whole host of social issues.
It's fine to stick with the whole under the age of consent thing; I get that, it's breaking the law and social mores. But, the whole innocence thing is just ludicrous ... heck, look at those girls with the Slender thing -- that shows you exactly how violence and horror in games can affect some kids. But, I'm sorry, sex will never be as "dangerous" to people as violence.
And, suggesting that these games attracts felons more than something like Grand Theft Auto or, hell, Madden, is ludicrous and unsubstantiated.
freenudemacusers
Member
many celebrated artists have painted underaged women and it's celebrated as culturally significant and discussed in our most prestigious universities, but a no-name artist works on a video game and it's scorned.
It may be art, but it's art designed around selling animated child porn to a specific audience. NeoGAF has the right to not allow discussion of what is ostensibly animated child porn.
You can go publish this game or make it if you wish, but I think they are in the right here. A lot of anime goes over the line too. That's my line though.
There is a pretty universal ethical standard on the exploitation of children. These games exist as a loophole to serve a very specific audience.
How is this post creepy
Dragonborn
Member
You know, children aren't on their own. Parents could do their jobs and Parent. Doing some research before blindly going out and getting whatever your kid wants, would solve that issue.
DICKS AHOY
Banned
Ironically I think Rule of Rose got banned somewhere in Europe (I want to say Italy?) since the marketers for that particular region played up those controversial elements to the point where I guess people thought it was far worse than it actually was.
Would you still feel the same knowing that this could
I'm sorry for falling for it. I should have known.
Zabant
Member
Let me throw out a few questions and thoughts.
If the characters in these games were very obviously fully-grown and adult women, and the discussion is pretty much in line with the previous Criminal Girl threads; in that they mostly involved discussion about the sexual pandering parts and "this game is for pervs/why does this exist?" would the moderation team object people to making threads about the game?
Is the issue here that the characters look like children or that there is sexual pandering and that's mostly what is being discussed?
I personally find the sexualization of children and teenagers that is present in a small number of Japanese games (Hyperdimension Neptunia etc) to be, well more than a little creepy, but it's obviously there for a reason and it does not seem like it's going to stop.
For example there's a scene in Persona 3 (Fantastic game IMO) that some people would argue is more than a little eyebrow raising.
As long as stuff like this is in games then this is going to be an issue and people are going to discuss it, whether that be in disgust or approval. Banning discussion on certain games outright is a very blunt and imprecise way to deal with the problem and sets a very bad precedent for the future.
I understand that the moderation team does not want to deal with threads involving arguments about pedophilia or threads that have lots of NSFW images posted, but I would argue for clear cut rules that allow for discussion of the game as a whole, but not the controversial and thread derailing conversations within.
Something like "If a game has scenes of a (particular) questionable nature, please refrain from posting images or video of these scenes or derailing discussion so that they are the main topic.
and to back that up if mods don't want discussion of a certain subject like pedophilia as it leads to shit threads:
"Do not makes threads solely discussing scenes of a (particular) questionable nature within a certain game"
If the characters in these games were very obviously fully-grown and adult women, and the discussion is pretty much in line with the previous Criminal Girl threads; in that they mostly involved discussion about the sexual pandering parts and "this game is for pervs/why does this exist?" would the moderation team object people to making threads about the game?
Is the issue here that the characters look like children or that there is sexual pandering and that's mostly what is being discussed?
I personally find the sexualization of children and teenagers that is present in a small number of Japanese games (Hyperdimension Neptunia etc) to be, well more than a little creepy, but it's obviously there for a reason and it does not seem like it's going to stop.
For example there's a scene in Persona 3 (Fantastic game IMO) that some people would argue is more than a little eyebrow raising.
As long as stuff like this is in games then this is going to be an issue and people are going to discuss it, whether that be in disgust or approval. Banning discussion on certain games outright is a very blunt and imprecise way to deal with the problem and sets a very bad precedent for the future.
I understand that the moderation team does not want to deal with threads involving arguments about pedophilia or threads that have lots of NSFW images posted, but I would argue for clear cut rules that allow for discussion of the game as a whole, but not the controversial and thread derailing conversations within.
Something like "If a game has scenes of a (particular) questionable nature, please refrain from posting images or video of these scenes or derailing discussion so that they are the main topic.
and to back that up if mods don't want discussion of a certain subject like pedophilia as it leads to shit threads:
"Do not makes threads solely discussing scenes of a (particular) questionable nature within a certain game"
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
I love this thread. Like Adam Jensen, I don't even know what side I'm on. I'm not exactly thrilled by wyrdwad artistic anarchist future but I can see the appeal given some reactions here.
I think is not worth for Criminal Girls so I'm going to sleep, I have class tomorrow.
I think is not worth for Criminal Girls so I'm going to sleep, I have class tomorrow.
Relativ9
Member
And thank god for it, lets hope the mods start closing more threads like this (games depicting underage characters in sexual contexts). If you like thst kind of thing go to 4chan, Neogaf gets enough shit from the industry not to be recluse of (harsh but true) pervs and pedophiles.
Hours Left
Member
That's what I thought, but I wanted to be sure.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Nooooo!!!!
HamPster PamPster
Member
Woah there, that's a lot to ask of the average american for what I see everyday at work. I have a customer service job and it's usually pretty obvious who the good parents are.
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
I disagree, actually. I think art reflects reality, but I don't believe it AFFECTS reality. Not on any significant level, anyway.
Art can be a catalyst for behavior, certainly... but it's not the art that CAUSES the behavior, but rather TRIGGERS it. The potential for that behavior always existed within the individual, and if the art in question didn't exist, something else would inevitably have set him/her off in its place.
I believe that as long as reality is dark and full of horrible things, so too will art be dark and full of horrible things. Art is solely a mirror of reality.
The difference, however, is that such an act has robbed another of his freedoms. And as soon as you're directly harming others in the name of art, you are a criminal.
A game which depicts horrible acts directed at fictional characters, however, is not directly harming anyone. Some may claim that it's INDIRECTLY harming others... but I would not. I believe that such art is completely and utterly harmless.
-Tom
The Miller test is bullshit though. I honestly can't see how anyone who's given the obscenity issue serious thought can think it's a good idea.
SenorArdilla
Member
You know that this is the same argument people make about violent video games, right?
DICKS AHOY
Banned
is your image URL broken or is that the pointCriminal Girls is art.
But not all art holds the same merit or has meaningful context.
Like, this is art:
But the merit it holds probably isn't substantial.
and this is exactly why some are worried about this precedent.
If Criminal Girls is the line fine...but if it begins to move to other perverted games..is where I think many get worried.
Well, it's kinda funny about that. Because the ESRB dictates what's exactly in the game and it even has a suggested rating for that. Parents, who aren't exactly into gaming or feel the need to delve into matters whether to see what game has certain content.
The ESRB makes that job easier by stating what is exactly in the game. The cool thing is, that ESRB doesn't say whether one should buy the game because of said content, rather it helps parents as said earlier.
By saying such an organization shouldn't exist as to people of all ages being exposed to all content as it leads to a "healthier" environment is really bizzare. Another thing is bizzare is that Tom says he approves of all forms of art, and that all things created are art and should be experienced.
I'm just wondering if people like Tom believe if videos of sexual abuse of children are infact art and what his thoughts on it are.
The real problem is when people agree with him and it like... seeds more horrible-stuff crystals.
I was going to say it was banned in Australia but sometimes 'banned in Australia' also means 'Atlus published it'.
I could never find it at retail, only through Amazon did I find it more recently.
EDIT: Yep! Here we go < Very interesting reading
I was scrolling around and didn't see the first half of that post at first. Sat there staring at it for about 2 minutes straight trying to figure out how someone still had an active account after saying bishoptl was being trite and didn't read the thread. Eventually deciphered it, lol
The point wasn't to champion that specific "test," it was to answer his rhetorical question about not seeing pornography as art, as though that was a ridiculous sentiment. The point I was making is that most would draw a distinction between pornography and art, and that the line is different for every person. Then I explained my personal line (the bit about expression).
I would, because I don't believe for a second that that's true. Art, as far as I'm concerned, can never make anyone do anything they wouldn't have already been inclined to do in the first place.
To be clear, I'm actually not arguing this point at all. NeoGAF's moderators are free to run the board however they wish. I may not agree with their decisions, but this isn't my board, and I'm not about to tell them what to do within their own jurisdiction.
I'm merely engaging in this debate on a philosophical level, because I strongly believe that censorship is morally and ethically wrong -- much more so than the acts being depicted in this or any other game.
-Tom
For some reason Ernest didn't want to come to Neogaf.
I should've left the post blank though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtCxvv8Y3Bs
Easton Dark
Member
It is a ridiculous sentiment.
How many penises does it take to get a drawing banned from a museum.
The guy in my example consented to being executed. he willingly forfeited his freedoms. Or are you saying (dun dun dun) that people don't have the freedom to choose to die?
Interface23
Member
I'm sure he doesn't as he just explained that using art as an excuse makes you a criminal
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Sorry guys but I'm laughing at half the avatars ITT.
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
Damn, I'm laughing so much right now.
Edit: I know you're joking and I'm fine with it, but I was not expecting a mod to make such a joke when it's shunned to judge people over their avatars on GAF.
I know others will get really pissed about it.
One of the main reasons I'm never changing my avatar is for this haha.
Edit: I know you're joking and I'm fine with it, but I was not expecting a mod to make such a joke when it's shunned to judge people over their avatars on GAF.
I know others will get really pissed about it.
- Status