|
Socoder -> On Topic -> Crossing the line in games? |
|
| Sat, 08 Aug 2009, 15:44 | |
Phoenix
|
Today I played a free game called Edmund. This game is quite controversial in nature, because you're actually playing a rapist. Visually, it is made out of pixel art*, so it is not very detailed in that manner. In any case, I think a disclaimer is due: If you're sensitive to this kind of stuff, you should probably not look at the video below or download the game. Do note though, that you won't be entitled to have an opinion about this, since any claims about the game will be completely unfounded. Video and download link: > Reveal 🔎 There seems to be a lot of talk surrounding this game. I think that we can all agree to that rape is disgusting and twisted, but in some threads about this game ([1][2]) many state that they do not want to download this game, and some think it's outright wrong to make a game about this. This strikes me as odd. In literature, movies (where it is even more explicit), and paintings, rape is allowed. But not in games. Hell, even sexual content is eschewed in video games. Why is that? When do we cross the line in games? Why is a game so different from a movie? From playing this game myself, I can say that while the atmosphere and the art was amazing, I wasn't really immersed into the assault. Just like gunning down some civilians in GTA doesn't make me feel guilt, this leaves me apathetic. You can say that it's interactive, but I say that it doesn't matter, because in the end, it's not real. I'm not really doing anything. Watching Jodie Foster in a gang-rape scene was far more disturbing than this was. Discuss: when do we cross the line in video games? Is there a line at all? * According to everyone except Jayenkai. |
| Sat, 08 Aug 2009, 16:53 | |
Jayenkai
|
There are plenty of dodgy DS games.. The touchscreen + Japanese freakyness = super Japanese touchy freakyness.. Sprites As a person who thinks that's a bit disturbing, I think that's a bit disturbing. As someone who likes games.. That's not much gameplay, there.. I'd complain more about that, than anything else. -=-=- ''Load, Next List!'' 
|
| Sat, 08 Aug 2009, 16:58 | |
|
Phoenix
|
It is disturbing, no doubt. This subject also borders on the question of whether games are an art form or not, since the game is pretty shallow gameplay-wise, as you said. |
| Sat, 08 Aug 2009, 16:59 | |
JL235
|
I've not heard of it before, but I'm not too impressed with Edmund as a game. It strikes me as just being LOOK, RAPE! and then failing to actually make anything with the subject matter. I think any type of media is crossing a line if it is (directly or indirectly) encouraging others to commit crimes, like rape (but this is not the same as people taking inspiration from media to commit a crime). Many books and videos do discuss and depict the act and victims of rape, but few actually take it so proficiently from the attackers perspective. i.e. when I play Edmund I can rape women. |
| Sun, 09 Aug 2009, 04:47 | |
|
Phoenix
|
The gameplay is boring/shallow/short/crap, and I don't think it's aiming for good gameplay, hence why I think this is one of the borderline cases of game and art. Whether it is good or not as art, is subjective. I think that the game would cross the line even more if you didn't have to rape a woman, because then the player would actually choose this, as opposed to being forced to do it. |
| Sun, 09 Aug 2009, 12:07 | |
Evil Roy Ferguso
|
Some time ago I decided to simplify my definition of art to "anything created with intentions of aesthetics or entertainment." It's not the "right" definition, but it allows me to bow out of "is it art" discussions, which is convenient because I am sick of them. Just because it's art doesn't mean it's good or that I like it, though. This attempt to shock people is so shallow that it isn't even offensive. It's just like, "Gee, rape is bad. Doing bad things in games is controversial. This game is controversial." |
| Sun, 09 Aug 2009, 14:02 | |
|
Phoenix
|
 "anything created with intentions of aesthetics or entertainment." Seems like a perfectly valid definition of art. This topic was not created with the intent of reviewing this game. It doesn't matter if it's a shallow attempt, if the gameplay sucks, if the visuals are nice, etc. What I was trying to do was to create a discussion about was if video games are allowed to have controversial content, be it poorly shown or otherwise. The original question was: when do we cross the line in video games? Is there a line at all? JL235 thinks that games cross the line when games encourage crime, in one way or another. Tikihead thinks that games cross the line when they force the player to do something immoral, or when the game has no other purpose. I don't think these arguments are good enough though. There are heaps of games where you play as a criminal, which ought to encourage crime just as much as this does, if not even more. Murder is horrible and disturbing, yet it is prevalent in games. Do these games also cross the line? I think that we're simply not used to rape yet. Killing is so common in games that we don't mind. |
| Sun, 09 Aug 2009, 14:46 | |
Afr0
|
I think someone should make a Terrance and Phillip game where people can light each other's farts, spew on each other and talk dirty. 
-=-=- Afr0 Games Project Dollhouse on Github - Please fork!
|
|
|
| |||
|
| ||||