Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
This doesn't appear to be anywhere nearly as nuanced as Brass Eye. This is closer to Blue Jam.
Hotline Miami 2's implied rape scene probes limits of player morality; authors react
- Thread starter Dawg
- Start date
- Status
This doesn't appear to be anywhere nearly as nuanced as Brass Eye. This is closer to Blue Jam.
Wait, so...
In-game characters simulate a rape scene for a movie for glamor and money (I guess) -> morally bankrupt turds
Hotline Miami developers simulate a rape scene for a videogame, for glamor and money (more likely) -> ???
Are you serious?
People get pleasure from violence also. Whether if its karate or boxing I love the feeling of hitting someone or being able to withstand a hit. I love the feeling of winning a match. So I would imagine that killing can be a pleasurable act.
People today are taught that killing is something that you shouldn't revel in. That hasn't always been the case in human history.
Yes? I don't get how someone judges the fictional in-game creators of a movie as "morally bankrupt turds" for making a mock rape scene, but not hold the game creators to the same standard for doing the same exact thing. Keep in mind that, as per the video footage of the game, you are led to believe it's an actual rape happening until the reveal happens and you realize it's a movie. So yeah, I think if you're going to call people filming a fake rape "morally bankrupt", then the same applies to videogame developers putting a fake rape in their videogame. At least be consistent and hold the in-game characters to the same standard and say they're just artists doing their thing.
Zoe
Member
The creators are engaging in social commentary about the act of making (and enjoying) borderline snuff films.
Moon_frogger
Member
Lol paintball doesn't have grenades and melee weapons. And paintball is still simulated killing at its core. Not sure why people are even bringing up paintball
Zoe
Member
It's only snuff if the point goes over your head.
I'm sure rape porn constantly questions the viewer about why they are enjoying what they are watching. Did you even read the dialogue after that scene, how they portray the director of the movie in the game?
This is you right now:
GameGuru59
Banned
Good is a subjective label, but (like the word art) there is basically an agreed upon realm (constructed by society) of that which is good. Most people would agree the Mother Teresa is a good person, or did good work. Most people would not associate the word good with Hitler. Of course there are people that Hitler did good things (Neo Nazis and such) but they are socially marginalized...meaningless if you will. Therefore, if you
believe hydrogen atoms are art in the same context that Michelangelo's paintings are, then your opinion is essentially meaningless because your worldview is clearly so divorced from society's that it renders the discussion fruitless.
You can think urine tastes good, but you can't expect to have a meaningful discussion about what tastes good if your definition of "good" is so broad that you are willing to include urine- something's taste from which most humans are repelled by instinct. I might as an individual think Big Rigs is a good game, but no one would take me seriously for thinking so, making any further discussion of quality games fruitless. I would have surrendered my credibility in the discussion.
The meaning of subjective worlds like "art" and "good" are defined by society. However, like a gradient that goes from red to blue (or any other color), it is impossible to tell exactly when red becomes blue. We only know that there is "good" and "evil", or "art" and "design". At the extremes, when know them when we see them. Interesting discussion happens in the middle.
In this context, I consider Hotline Miami art. Therefore, I do not see the series as games that should be designed to appeal to different players- and players should not expect it to be designed to their specifications. Instead, the game should be taken as it is (as you would any art piece), and criticized from that perspective. That's why I have trouble with the tenor of this discussion. Criticisms like "maybe it should have been designed with female gamers in mind" or "maybe they should consider the feelings of rape victims" are illogical in the context of an art piece. Would you ask such questions of a painting? Or would you search for meaning within the painting, and criticize (or laud) the message its trying to convey? To me, criticisms like this are akin to criticizing a nude statue as being inappropriate for children.
Wat. Its meta commentary and a period piece of a time where these sorts of things weren't uncommon in films.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Not sure either, but paintball does have grenades.
I certainly wouldn't, and neither would Christopher Hitchens.
...I'm getting dangerously off-topic though, so I'll stop. (I generally agree with your point about stretching a definition so thin as to lose its meaning, but I'm not sure what you're even trying to argue with that.)
RelentlessRolento
Member
With what I felt during the first game, I'm totally fine with this scene in the final game.
GameGuru59
Banned
The bolded part is what I'm arguing. I address the context of HM2 in the final paragraph of that post.
lol, I actually did spend a few seconds trying to think of a person who would be universally accepted... how about Gandhi then?
The same criticism keeps getting levelled at Spec Ops and frankly it's a moot point. Making the player question why he enjoys the content of the game isn't the same as a fuck you to the player, fuck yous to the player are what Phil Fish writes on Twitter.
OniBarubary
Banned
GameGuru59
Banned
No one's perfect...Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Yeah, I put it crassly but it's more than that. It's putting a gun in front of someone, asking them to use it and then admonishing them for doing so. The developer is equally as culpable, if not more so, than the player. It seems entirely self defeating.
You don't have to be a Neo-Nazi to think Hitler was the 'good guy' (bear with me here). Oridnary German's cicra 1930s genuinely thought very well of him, many countries (including Britian) considered him an ally for a long time prior to WW2. That would be a time when society deemed him 'good', just as whatever society you are part of now deems him 'bad'.
A society's morals change over time, quite drastically in some cases. There are no true absolute qualities (unless you believe in some kind of higher power), rendering such value judgments effectively meaningless on a long enough time scale and outside your personal experiences.
...Don't even get me started on Mother T. XD
Now, on the one hand you say "good" is subjective, then say it is an agreed upon value by society, making it entirely not subjective (at least on the individual level).
"Art" isn't the same as a value judgement like "good". People don't just get to call things "Art" just because they like them. There needs to be an agreed upon standard. Imagine if everyone on the planet were "special", right? Wouldn't that make being "special" completely devoid of meaning?
Nonexistinghero
Banned
The main reason why they're not common in games is exactly because it's pretty much taboo. Aside from that:
- Not a lot of publishers would be willing to alllow it. They might still publish something with implied rape, but with something more visual they probably wouldn't.
- Media would jump all over it. People will also start blaming games for rape.
- A ton of countries would ban the game from releasing in their country.
I do.
freenudemacusers
Member
Plus, you know, the whole black people are inferior thing.
So many false equivalencies in this thread it's hard to know where to begin.
The reason why I made that post is because some said its always video games getting criticized the most presumably when it comes to rape and I countered by saying there aren't many games with sexual violence in them
The fact that you see it as a false equivalency says something.
Oh? Would you compare rape to murder? Or do you think it might be wiser to see them as two different and separate acts, each with their own unique problems which aren't the same aside from both acts involving violence?
Courts established, long ago, that not even all murders are equivalent. It's rather ludicrous to argue that murder and rape are the same.
Furthermore, violence and murder in videogames are hardly equivalent to violence and murder in the real world (whereas other media tend to treat these acts with more seriousness). Though it is curious that videogames are typically the only medium which try to make murder and violence fun.
I believe his point was that murder is probably more heinous than rape, or at least in his opinion it was?
Therefore to not be offended by murder, but rape being the trigger point, is interesting.
Murder's not really treated as murder in a videogame. You aren't arrested, you aren't taken to trial, you aren't even really chastised for it. It's just a device to get the player to take action. You don't go through PTSD when you kill somebody, you don't reflect on killing dozens or hundreds of people. There's no real change in the play of a videogame for killing any number of characters. It's treated as fun. It's why No Russian is an utter failure. Because even though you're performing an action, the action is treated as fun and enjoyable by the game.
Rape's different because there is a real societal issue with it (and because rape, thus far, has always been treated as rape - that said I doubt you could make the action "fun" - probably why most games take control away from the player when the action's performed). In other media rape is just as problematic, because it's generally considered a more insidious violation (though ironically the courts don't really seem to treat it that way).
We're inundated with a culture of murder and violence; taught that it's acceptable in the right circumstances. Rape's never taught as an acceptable behavior however. There's no self-defense law in place for rapists.
It's not, though. To be blunt, you can heal from a rape. If you're murdered...that's it. It's over. That's why it gets stiffer penalties.
Rapists are definitely scum as well and deserve every negative thing that happens to them, but it's still not killing.
The best counter-argument (as it relates to gaming) I've read in the thread came from Screaming where he said we love the thrill of combat, victory, and chaos, hence the almost side-effect of murder is accepted in gaming. And that makes sense to me.
Rape, though, is more repugnant because it's none of those things and is a pure power trip and violation. It's bad, man, and it's not like it's easy to make compelling gameplay around it either if we want to be crass.
THOSE are good arguments. What you're coming back to, though, repeatedly seems like insinuating rape is worse than murder which is...interesting...to me. It's definitely an opinion and not one too worth getting into, but based on purely the acts committed, not sure I can agree with you.
P.S. I actually thought No Russian was great conceptually. Storyline, wise, I could see it in a movie. The problem came in that no one expected it in a game like COD and the surrounding framework didn't really support it.
I'm saying that rape and murder are fundamentally different and that trying to compare the two is a fruitless endeavor (thus the false equivalency argument). They are both heinous acts, but they are differently heinous aside from the fact that they both involve violence. Society sees them differently and rightly so.
I'm not saying one is worse than the other. I'm saying they're both terrible but they involve different problems in our society.
Please note that what I mean when I say insidious violation; I mean that the violation is more personal. With the advent of guns and other weapons technologies, murder is much less personal than it once was. I'm not attempting to imply that one is worse than the other.
GameGuru59
Banned
I agree, the standard of what is considered "art" varies from person to person. I've already provided my definition in this thread a few pages back. I think it accounts for that vast majority of what people call "art". Most of the time, when people call something art, I think they're trying to say: "x" thing is free of creative constraints. Design, the opposite of art, exists to serve a function- by definition bound by certain creative constraints.
The vast majority of bridges are designed by engineers to function as a safe means of crossing something. This not art. However, some bridges can simultaneously fulfill their function whilst being less bound by creative constraints. This is where the gradient between art and design comes from. Is the BP Pedestrian Bridge art or not? That will vary from person to person. But it is clearly more artistic than the common highway overpass.
Sure, but the argument made against you still stands. You're okay with killing in games, despite killing in real life the ending of one's life forever, no coming back....game over to use a bad pun.
Versus now a game using a portrayed rape to draw a parallel. And the game even goes out of its way to show it's not real and it's actors on a movie set.
That begets the rage? The worse crime is okay?!
It doesn't make sense if looked at purely from player agency and encouragement to not raise protests versus murder and go against the rape portrayed in this game. It's borderline hypocritical and screams of either baggage or ulterior motives because murder can be argued to be worse.
[edit]
Didn't see your edit before I posted, apologies.
I get what you're saying, but that's pretty subjective. You can still murder with far more personal and close-up methods and in Hotline Miami, you tend to do that just as often in the series.
I still think that they are different acts, and I still that killing in games is not the same as killing in real life. The actions are treated fundamentally differently.
I honestly consider the fact that it's made into a cutscene to be more insidious. It doesn't try to make the player complicit in the act, instead it opts for forcing the character to take an action. I find the fact that they're trying to weasel out of a serious issue by going "oh it's just an act" as being seriously cowardly about the problem.
It would be like a movie director doing it (particularly since this is a cutscene). It cheapens the message immensely and makes it looks like the director doesn't have the gumption to take on the message they're implying.
Maybe put another way - it's why I didn't have any trouble with
Saints Row 3 and the "wanna fuck" dialogue. Sex was treated as a joke, as a method of cultural exchange between gangsters, not a serious issue. It was just something characters did. If you want to treat sex like a joke, Saints Row 3 shows you how to do that.
I think my problem with sex in games is that game developers don't understand their mechanics well enough to actually use those mechanics in a meaningful way with sex. Though maybe more pertinently, most games mechanics' simply cannot support having meaningful sexual relationships. A game that's all about shooting stuff isn't going to say anything about sex, because shooting and sex simply don't mesh. The means and ends of these two acts could not be more polar.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Sorry, I think I'm being a bit thick here, if what is considered Art varies from person to person, how can there be an objective definition of Art? What is the point of defining something as Art, if anything can be Art? That doesn't make sense.
AuthenticM
Member
I can't find the quote of the authors reacting to the press. Where is it ?
Assuming there's consent what's wrong with that?
Why stop there? Censor the entire game. What about people who have triggers like war veterans seeing the violence? Does anyone care about them? Nope. But some random pixels depicting rape is singled out? Double standards much?
Censor the entire game or none at all. Like seeing guts sprayed isn't considered crass or tasteless. People who whine about these things are annoying. It's art. Regardless how tasteless you might think it is think about what you're asking. It's self-entitled and pathetic.
Wah, wah...I'm a rape victim and I find it offensive. Did that same person care to think about the rest of the game and what triggers it has on other people? But no, just deal with the rape scene and all is ok because I'm selfish.
Censor the entire game or none at all. Like seeing guts sprayed isn't considered crass or tasteless. People who whine about these things are annoying. It's art. Regardless how tasteless you might think it is think about what you're asking. It's self-entitled and pathetic.
Wah, wah...I'm a rape victim and I find it offensive. Did that same person care to think about the rest of the game and what triggers it has on other people? But no, just deal with the rape scene and all is ok because I'm selfish.
GameGuru59
Banned
I've already answered this. It is entirely legitimate to debate whether Hotline Miami is art. Whether it is or not will vary from person to person. But there's a certain threshold of credibility something has to bring to the table to be considered art by a majority of level headed individuals. If your definition of art is so broad to include instances which most people would not accept as art, then your legitimacy is wounded in the debate. There is no bianary definition of art. As I said before, its a gradient between art and design- and what is art and what is design varies from person to person (this model excludes incidental, unintentional creations like a trail of footprints or tire tracks). However, some range of the gradient is agreed upon when considering augments within a discussion; otherwise, it would be impossible to have the discussion. It's like negotiating the terms of peace talks between two nations- there is a mutual understanding of what the other nation is likely to accept, otherwise there is no purpose for the peace talks to occur- except in discussions regarding art and other mundane topics, this happens subconsciously. If there is no general agreement regarding what is art, then a productive discussion cannot occur.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Nobody said anything about censorship. Also, saying "Wah, wah...I'm a rape victim" is just.... wow.
OniBarubary
Banned
Consent is a funny thing when you take advantage of people's beliefs and feelings.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Gosh, I wish I had such confidence in my opinions, especially about something as nebulous as the "What is Art" argument. I didn't realise the question had been answered.
Tell me, who in society decides "What is Art" in an objective sense?
Depending on your definition of it, I would not consider "design" at the opposite end of the spectrum to Art, rather function. I would also strongly disagree that the interesting discussions regarding Art lie in the middle of your arbritrary scale. It is at the fringe that the most interesting discussions occur.
GameGuru59
Banned
An objective value is a binary. I've said multiple times now that I do not view art and design as a binary, but as a gradient.
"Design" is the opposite of art. So if earlier I considered art this:
Art: Anything not designed (or created) to meet certain expectations or specifications, but still done for a purpose.
the design must be....
Design: Anything purposely created to meet certain expectations or specifications.
Note the art's definition has been extended to exclude incidental creations that are not purposeful. That is a third metric that we can debate (whether the intention to create something at all is necessary to consider something art), and is also a gradient.
A simplistic version of my model is this...
Art-------------------------Design
A more complex model that takes into account conscious purpose looks like this. I'm not entirely sure I agree with this model; I haven't thought about it as much.
...................Unintentional
............................|
............................|
............................|
............................|
Art-------------------------------------------Design
............................|
............................|
............................|
............................|
.....................Intentional
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
I got that, but you also agreed earlier that there needs to be a consensus or standard (as close to an objective decision as we're likely to get) about 'What is Art', which is why I asked.
Okay, you think so and that's grand, but I don't agree with your definition of design being the opposite of Art. It simply doesn't hold up. Example: a significant portion of what are generally considered "Great" works of Art were commissioned, so certain expectations and specifications were fulfilled by the creation of the artwork. Even though they lie at the extreme opposite of your gradient table, it doesn't mean they aren't Art.
To be clear, I've not said HM shouldn't or couldn't be considered as Art. All I',m getting at is that there has to be an objective definition for Art otherwise it can be anything. Many artists throughout the years have gone out of their way to challenge what Art is (and they exist at the very fringes of the Art world at the time)...
Do you think we derailed this thread enough?
GameGuru59
Banned
If you look back in the thread I've gone over that too, with examples. But yeah, we're off topic.
Off topic, but....
Since there isn't a proper HM2 OT yet, here's the M.O.O.N. - Particles EP that some of which will likely be used for the OST.
MP3 download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?ve78hxrt7r9jgdr
Enjoy!
Really digging "Dust" and "Warehouse" personally.
Since there isn't a proper HM2 OT yet, here's the M.O.O.N. - Particles EP that some of which will likely be used for the OST.
MP3 download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?ve78hxrt7r9jgdr
Enjoy!
Really digging "Dust" and "Warehouse" personally.
- Status