Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Moderator: Milldawg

User avatar

Topic author
DrumsofWar
Protoss Infested Terran (Unemployed)
Protoss Infested Terran (Unemployed)
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 12:55 pm
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby DrumsofWar » Sun Nov 07, 2010 1:42 pm

I'd have to disagree with the whole argument that certain mediums are higher art than others. Printed books themselves started as a more "common" and peasant way to spread religious publications compared to the Latin Vulgate which was written in the more "ancient and pure" tongue.

We didn't even HAVE anything resembling novels until 200 years after Gutenberg's printing press was made. Presuming that an artistic and creative medium which has existed for only 20 years and only has had the ability to convey advanced messages in the past TEN is purely a business (which both painting and sculpture were for millenia) is a naive and very snobbish presumption.


Archangel
Terran Nuclear Silo Safety Inspector
Terran Nuclear Silo Safety Inspector
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:01 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby Archangel » Sun Nov 07, 2010 1:50 pm

tipereth wrote:Turn your argument around: Who really gives a fuck if future video games wont allow the player to engage in hideously violent (or generally 'obscene') acts? It's not like video games have any artistic merit, or like they're culturally significant enough that no longer being able to shoot the heads off imaginary characters will matter to anyone. Oh, no, you say, YOU care. Why? Because it's OH GOD CENSORSHIP GET IT AWAY? Censorship is bad because it stifles artistic creativity. Video games are a business, not an artistic medium. (and the ones that do try to push the GAMES ARE ART thing aren't the ones under fire, anyway) BUT THE CENSORSHIP JUST STARTS THERE FOOT IN THE DOOR shut the fuck up. Think about how many people would REALLY care about video game censorship, compared to like, film or TV or media censorship. There is no way in hell that the government would be able to use censoring video games as a staging point for other forms of censorship.

Obscenity in literature (Ulysses, Beat authors, and the like) has historically been a way to push the medium beyond what the last generation did with it, a way to express emotions that they felt the old methods of prose just couldn't handle properly. Video games are made strictly for profit. There's nothing wrong with that, and I think that companies should have the right to produce a product if the public will buy it. If video games are censored, people will still buy them.

I know I'm not going to sway your position on this, but try to understand that the majority of the people who aren't with you on this aren't against you, they just don't fucking care.


I love it. "Games aren't art, so WHO CARES ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT STOMPING ON CIVIL LIBERTIES?" You are so unapologetically lazy about the monster that is Government Expansion that you'll stand by and watch (and even shout down those who would oppose) Government trampling of our every-day lives. Until they come after you. At which point nobody will be left to fight for you because you let them all get eaten first. Because you're an idiot.

You're assuming a whole fucking lot to stay on your side. Let me help you out.

YOU may not care.

BUSINESS does.

I'm a pretty big business owner, I have several corporations under my name. I employ roughly 1,000 individuals in North Florida, so just sit down for a minute and let me educate your fuckwad careless brain.

BUSINESS doesn't want to fight tooth and nail to sell a product. BUSINESS doesn't want to stay in a market where the customerbase dwindles. BUSINESS likes easy, likes predictable, likes security, likes profit.

Now, none of these things are definite in any industry, in fact, some of them don't exist at all. But what IS definite is that absolutely NO BUSINESS is going to jump headlong into an industry they know is going to throw whatever supernanny shit their way.

Government supernannied the fuck out of the auto industry, forcing corporations to bow to Union dues. So the auto industry closed their doors and traveled to a place where Government and Unions didn't exist. Those that stayed (through force and pressure of outside entities) have suffered tremendously and now one of them is owned by the Government.

tipereth wrote:If cars are censored, people will still buy them.

Absolutely correct! And they still do! But don't tell that to Michigan!

When you tell a Game Developer (which you can look at as a BUSINESS that HIRES PEOPLE (read: PROVIDES JOBS)) that they can make a game - no problem! - "only, we're going to cut your consumer base by 75% because we're fucking vagina-sticked bitchmongers" that Game Developer is going to do two things:

1) Make less games that fit the non-existing demographic
and
2) Hire less people because they're making less games

What? What did you just think in your ridiculously vapid balloon head of yours? They'll just make the same ammount of non-violent video games? Do you even understand the market, shithead? WHO'S GOING TO BUY 15 DIFFERENT VARIANTS OF ANGRY BIRDS?!

We already have a non-violent video game SYSTEM on the market. It's called the Wii. If you have a pussy for a gut, just go buy that and shut the fuck up about everybody else.

Yes. People will still buy violent video games. But not everybody and not as many. If you think the market won't take a hit from this, you may not be a goddamned moron, but you sure as fuck know absolute dick about Business and you shouldn't be talking about it. But since you are, that makes you a goddamned moron anyway.

Censorship isn't just about needlessly chopping off the dicks of your peers to make them as fucking twat as you. Censorship is about hurting business and crippling economies. YOU may not care, because you don't rightly understand. But the people directly affected by this stupidity, that are counting on their jobs absolutely do.

See, this is the problem. You ass clowns don't care enough to understand bigger pictures. So you open that hole in your face that vomits a bunch of nonsense shit and muddles the debate. If you don't care anyway, then do us all a favor and shut your goddamned pie hole.

I as an American citizen protected under the core principles of our Constitution, despise censorship because it violates those principles as obnoxiously soon as RULE NUMBER FUCKING ONE.

I as an American business owner despise censorship because it is a gateway drug of the Federal Long Arm to endlessly regulate my business, maim my bottom line and jeopardize the securities of me and my employees.

When you're talking about censorship of a video game, you're not talking about the video game. You're talking about government politik. If you don't understand that, or you don't care enough to try, then you shouldn't be talking. All you are is a useful idiot to the Federal System.

And if you think this ends here, censorship on this level creates Judicial Precedence over any similar issue. You really want that rabit hole gaping wide? If that answer's "yes" you're a bigger idiot than I thought at the start of this post.

User avatar

IskatuMesk
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 8781
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: M͈̙̞͍͞ͅE̹H̨͇̰͈͕͇̫Ì̩̳CO̼̩̤͖͘
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby IskatuMesk » Sun Nov 07, 2010 4:18 pm

DUNE COON TYCOON
Image~[Gameproc]~Image
Warning: dialogue contains politically incorrect content. Viewer rearsore may occur.


tipereth
Zerg Hydralisk Nail Stylist
Zerg Hydralisk Nail Stylist
Posts: 599
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:37 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby tipereth » Sun Nov 07, 2010 4:32 pm

you're an idiot


I respectfully disagree.

BUSINESS doesn't want to fight tooth and nail to sell a product. BUSINESS doesn't want to stay in a market where the customerbase dwindles. BUSINESS likes easy, likes predictable, likes security, likes profit.


That's just the point. People aren't going to stop buying video games if they have less violence and obscenity. Companies wont stop making games if people don't stop buying them. I'm really having trouble understanding your argument here. You bring up the auto industry and unions, but that is a matter of labor laws. Yes, the government did intervene, and yes, jobs were lost and some economies suffered.

we're going to cut your consumer base by 75%


How does this happen? Are we at the point where we have an expected standard of violence, that if not met, we will not purchase the product? You argue

What? What did you just think in your ridiculously vapid balloon head of yours? They'll just make the same ammount of non-violent video games? Do you even understand the market, shithead?


Here's the best selling games of 2009:
(http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 88662.html)

1) Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (11.86 million global sales / 8.82 million in the USA)
2) Wii Sports Resort (7.57m / 4.54m)
3) New Super Mario Bros. Wii (7.41m / 4.23m)
4) Wii Fit Plus (5.8m / 3.53m)
5) Wii Fit (5.44m / 3.6m)

Okay, so Call of Duty would definitely be in danger of censorship. The remaining 4 titles almost certainly would not be. Clearly, there is a large (and growing!) market for non-violent video-games.

We already have a non-violent video game SYSTEM on the market. It's called the Wii. If you have a pussy for a gut, just go buy that and shut the fuck up about everybody else.


Fair enough, and the non-violent top titles are all Wii-exclusive. So, are you arguing that the censorship would hurt certain developers? Probably, and they would have to adapt. But, your argument is that

People will still buy violent video games. But not everybody and not as many. If you think the market won't take a hit from this, you may not be a goddamned moron, but you sure as fuck know absolute dick about Business and you shouldn't be talking about it. But since you are, that makes you a goddamned moron anyway.


I have no idea what you're trying to say. The only proof that the market would take a hit is (presumably) extrapolated from: Some people buy violent video games. If video games weren't allowed to be violent, people who buy violent video games would no longer buy video games. (Please correct me if you follow a different path of logic, so I can better understand your position)

So, in essence, you try to hold both the position of

You are so unapologetically lazy about the monster that is Government Expansion that you'll stand by and watch (and even shout down those who would oppose) Government trampling of our every-day lives. Until they come after you. At which point nobody will be left to fight for you because you let them all get eaten first. Because you're an idiot.


which is pretty much baseless, and

I as an American business owner despise censorship because it is a gateway drug of the Federal Long Arm to endlessly regulate my business, maim my bottom line and jeopardize the securities of me and my employees.


which is at least honest. You could have just said that from the beginning, if you sprinkle some relevant data on that you might have a talking point beyond

let me educate your fuckwad careless brain

WHO'S GOING TO BUY 15 DIFFERENT VARIANTS OF ANGRY BIRDS?!

(I'm pretty sure that any game play elements that work in violent games will work in non-violent games, with obvious shooter exceptions)
But since you are, that makes you a goddamned moron anyway.

I as an American citizen protected under the core principles of our Constitution, despise censorship because it violates those principles as obnoxiously soon as RULE NUMBER FUCKING ONE.

I know you mean the Bill of Rights, but you might want to read up on some obscenity hearings. I know video games are not pornography, but I imagine similar standards for 'obscenity' would come up. (Thus my whole bit about games not being art, or culturally relevant, but what do I know?)


You really want that rabit hole gaping wide? If that answer's "yes" you're a bigger idiot than I thought at the start of this post.


See, I'm in not saying 'yes'. You just really badly want me to be, and that puts you in a 'if you aren't with me, you're against me' mindset. Show me some relevant precedent, with real numbers in it. You probably wont change my opinion, but I'm now genuinely curious as to the effect of censorship on a market.

User avatar

IskatuMesk
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 8781
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: M͈̙̞͍͞ͅE̹H̨͇̰͈͕͇̫Ì̩̳CO̼̩̤͖͘
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby IskatuMesk » Sun Nov 07, 2010 4:38 pm

People aren't going to stop buying video games if they have less violence and obscenity.


WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWRONG

it will kill the market and everyone will move back to terrible movies like avatar that have make believe violence

FUCK THINK OF THE KIDS YOU INCONSIDERATE ASSHOLE
Image~[Gameproc]~Image
Warning: dialogue contains politically incorrect content. Viewer rearsore may occur.


Archangel
Terran Nuclear Silo Safety Inspector
Terran Nuclear Silo Safety Inspector
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:01 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby Archangel » Sun Nov 07, 2010 4:56 pm

Oh God. Avatar.

User avatar

Xenon
Zerg Queen's Nest Slave Trainee
Zerg Queen's Nest Slave Trainee
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:29 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby Xenon » Sun Nov 07, 2010 5:05 pm

Archangel> Come on man, if you can't control the rage at least try to tone down the insults?

Tipereth> Only for profit? How much more profit-driven is the video game industry than film? TV? Fiction? How are in-game cutscenes and FMV fundamentally different from film?

And custom content! How much profit do the producers of custom content on this site receive?! Look at what Actiblizzion has done to custom content in SC2, along with forced centralization of content, overzealous censorship and the removal of open communication in general (open chat rooms, named games). Then look at the Activision annual report from March 2010:

Our results of operations or reputation may be harmed as a result of offensive consumer posted content.

We are subject to risks associated with the collaborative online features in our games, such as World of Warcraft 's online chat feature, which allows consumers to post narrative comment, in real time, that is visible to other players. Despite our efforts to restrict inappropriate consumer content, from time to time objectionable and offensive consumer content may be posted to a World of Warcraft gaming site or the sites of other games or game services, such as Battle.net, with online chat features or game forums which allow consumers to post comments. We may be subject to lawsuits, governmental regulation or restrictions, and consumer backlash (including decreased sales and harmed reputation), as a result of consumers posting offensive content, any of which could harm our operating results.


Coincidence?



Oh God. Avatar.


I hear ya.
Last edited by Xenon on Sun Nov 07, 2010 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Archangel
Terran Nuclear Silo Safety Inspector
Terran Nuclear Silo Safety Inspector
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:01 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby Archangel » Sun Nov 07, 2010 5:10 pm

Tipowhatever the fuck your name is,

I was typing out this big response to address everything you said. But then I realized that you actually didn't read what I said. Instead you cherrypicked sentences without context and then performed strawmans. I don't have time for that. I don't have time for you. That fact that you cited a "top 5 games sold" as your vast knowledge of HOW THE MARKET WORKS tells me you know dick about how markets work.

You're not worth anybody's time. Enjoy feeling smart. I'm done with you.

User avatar

wibod
Zerg Creep Colony Landscaper
Zerg Creep Colony Landscaper
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:55 am
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby wibod » Sun Nov 07, 2010 5:13 pm

Q some of the people making custom content for TF2s market place got 50,000 in the first month.

User avatar

Xenon
Zerg Queen's Nest Slave Trainee
Zerg Queen's Nest Slave Trainee
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:29 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby Xenon » Sun Nov 07, 2010 5:26 pm

Yes, but that's hardly "all" of custom content producers. Until Blizzard came up with their "marketplace" (which I think is also responsible for the severe restrictions) the only time I ever heard of someone trying to profit off custom content in their games were the crappy campaigns authorized by Blizzard and the guy who stole KurenaiJiku's Gundam Century total conversion and tried to sell it.

User avatar

wibod
Zerg Creep Colony Landscaper
Zerg Creep Colony Landscaper
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:55 am
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby wibod » Sun Nov 07, 2010 5:30 pm

Xenon wrote:Yes, but that's hardly "all" of custom content producers. Until Blizzard came up with their "marketplace" (which I think is also responsible for the severe restrictions) the only time I ever heard of someone trying to profit off custom content in their games were the crappy campaigns authorized by Blizzard and the guy who stole KurenaiJiku's Gundam Century total conversion and tried to sell it.


Well obviously it's not all, it's those producing content that's desirable to the community at large. Also Microsoft has their XBLA developer kit, but making money off that has been a hassle due to the minimal advertising and people not wanting to spend money on player created things on consoles. It still basically comes down to people wanting to buy things that are cool or of high quality.


tipereth
Zerg Hydralisk Nail Stylist
Zerg Hydralisk Nail Stylist
Posts: 599
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:37 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby tipereth » Sun Nov 07, 2010 5:46 pm

I'm done with you.

K.

Q> I didn't mean to imply that video games had no artistic merit simply because they are made for profit. I think that video games have no artistic merit as a medium, period. That is my opinion. I'm not going to argue the definitions of art or obscenity or whatever because this is an internet forum and nobody is gonna change their minds about anything.
Last edited by tipereth on Sun Nov 07, 2010 6:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Archangel
Terran Nuclear Silo Safety Inspector
Terran Nuclear Silo Safety Inspector
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:01 pm
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby Archangel » Sun Nov 07, 2010 6:47 pm

Xenon wrote:Archangel> Come on man, if you can't control the rage at least try to tone down the insults?


No. I enjoy it. It is entertaining to me to see how much I can insult people who "don't care."

Anyhoo, here's something you might find interesting:

One of my industries is Film, as you and a few people know here. So here in America, we have a ratings system run by a private council called the MPAA or the Motion Picture Association of America. If you see a rating on a movie, it was given by this agency. As illustrated by the film, "This Film is Not Yet Rated," the ratings are sketchy, inconsistent and driven heavily by dirty politics and who-you-know. Now fortunately the rating system is also completely voluntary. You don't have to have your film rated to be sold in the market or shown in theaters. However, our society has grown so accustomed to the system that should you refuse or otherwise neglect to have your film rated, it becomes negatively stigmatized and many assume your film must be some sort of obscene porno or whathaveyou. Bottom line is, you don't have to but if you want your film in the mass public, it certainly helps to have your film rated by the MPAA.

OK. NOW let's jump to Germany (or anywhere else in the big-government European world). But before we do, let's keep in mind that Germany's European standard of Government control and regulation has had hundreds of years to develop and while we're certainly heading in that direction, we haven't gotten remotely close yet.

Germany's "MPAA" is now Government run. Its council is made up entirely of Federal employees.

For film makers in Germany - whether you're a studio or just some schmuck with a digicam - if you want your movie ANYWHERE, it absolutely must be viewed and approved by the German council. If, for any reason, the council doesn't like your movie, it's stamped "Not Approved" (or however they write it in German) and it is not allowed on the market at all, ever.

If you have a poster of it anywhere and the government finds out, the poster will be ripped from your wall and you will be fined.

If your movie is found on a store shelf, the owner will be fined, jailed and their store will be shut down.

It doesn't matter what your budget is. $10. $10,000,000. Everyone is subject to this Censorship.

Here's the great part: If your film is not approved by the council, they don't tell you why. They just say that it isn't. Furthermore, if it isn't approved, you will have to wait thirty or more years before you can appeal for another review from the council, hoping that your blind changes are what they wanted. For this reason Day of the Dead is still banned in Germany.

Hitting closer to home so the gamer geeks "who don't care" can relate, Call of Duty: Black Ops is banned in Germany.

And if you think this is isolated, almost every other country bans games. Dead Space is banned in Germany, China and Japan.

In the middle east they have an agency who's name translates to Moral Police. Before any film can even be made, or a foreign film can enter the country, it must be approved by this council for moral acceptability. If it doesn't pass, it doesn't get in.

This is how it starts, giving the Government a single inch into our free-market world any way they can. They tried to tell us what we can say and they failed. So now they're trying to tell us who we can say it to, and they've partially succeeded. Once they gain complete control of that, it will be cake to backtrack.

Germany's and other country's censorship has made it impossible to rise up to the level of media superiority our Free Market and Free Speech has allowed us here. I'm not talking about good movies. I'm talking about economic strength. Aside from the hundreds of major motion pictures released each year, we have thousands of independent films flying out to the rest of the world making a lot of small people big money. If we were to finally transition to the European standard (a goal not dismissed by the ruling parties), those smaller firms would not survive and our economic strength in the film market would dwindle to irrelevancy. We would be just another crab in the bucket.

That's why people like me constantly fight bullshit like this. If we didn't exist, we'd already be there.

User avatar

IskatuMesk
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 8781
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: M͈̙̞͍͞ͅE̹H̨͇̰͈͕͇̫Ì̩̳CO̼̩̤͖͘
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby IskatuMesk » Sun Nov 07, 2010 7:03 pm

most of my videos that got censored on youtube only got censored in germany

don't let hitler kill my audience of rapists and serial killers
Image~[Gameproc]~Image
Warning: dialogue contains politically incorrect content. Viewer rearsore may occur.

User avatar

Topic author
DrumsofWar
Protoss Infested Terran (Unemployed)
Protoss Infested Terran (Unemployed)
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 12:55 pm
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments on video game censorship

Postby DrumsofWar » Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:53 pm

One thing I always found ironic is that the one sub-genre of gaming that everyone else in gaming looks down on, first-person shooters (usually just an iota above Madden 64 and Aladdin the Game) have fostered the most custom content. Beyond just the success stories of Counterstrike and Portal, the companies are usually more tolerant compared to RTS.

(Blizzard, for all the hate it gets here, is probably the most mod-tolerant overall compared to EA, Ensemble, and such.)


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests