Slashdot Mirror


Retailers Won't Sell New Acclaim Game

DrEnter writes "According to this Yahoo article, Wal-Mart, Toys R Us, and Kay-Bee Toys are refusing to carry Acclaim's new video game 'BMX XXX'. Best Buy has stated it will sell a censored version of the game. Acclaim is billing it as the first major release game to feature full-action nudity, with prostitutes and pimps and main characters. A Wal-Mart spokesman stated "We're not going to carry any software with any vulgarity or nudity -- we're just not going to do it." I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart sells rated-R movies (including those arguably targeted at the same age group as this game is), so make your own judgement..."

680 comments

  1. In related news... by Dimensio · · Score: 4, Funny

    Acclaim has announced that the refusal of some retailers to carry the game would have no impact on sales, as no one has planned to buy the worthless piece of crap anyway.

    1. Re:In related news... by coene · · Score: 4, Interesting

      On some level I agree (the Tony Hawks and BMX games popularity is a little crazy -- and this takes is a step further), but on a complete different level... This game looks funny as hell.

      If you havent seen the trailer, http://www.fileshack.com/file.x?fid=1222.

      Seriously, the trailer makes it worth a rent at minimum... What red blooded male doesent like sports + nudity + pimps + hookers + weapons.. Especially in digital form!

      Hey, the world is in moral decay.. and its only gonna get worse. This is the biggest step forward since GTA3. I say enjoy the ride.

    2. Re:In related news... by M3shuggah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...as no one has planned to buy the worthless piece of crap anyway.

      You're right! Their target audience of lonely guys will probably have enough time on their hands to sit on IRC and wait for slow transfer from the DCC server.

    3. Re:In related news... by uncoveror · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What was acclaim thinking? Stores aren't going to carry an XXX game in a country where John Ashcroft has "Lady Justice" clad in a burqa.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
    4. Re:In related news... by Moloch666 · · Score: 1

      or even a person with no time on their hands could start it in the morning before work, start playing it when they get home...

      --
      Understanding is a three-edged sword. -- Kosh Naranek
    5. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The contrary will prove to be true. We will probably see an increased interest in the game now that some mahjor retailers have refused to sell it.

      On the other hand, it may very well be a "piece of crap."

    6. Re:In related news... by Squareball · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah
      but it is ironic that they will usually carry games where you can KILL others but the minute you show some one naked it's vulger.

      So the message to the youth... making love is bad. Killing is good.

      so mindless.

    7. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      im not signing up with fileshack to download video game titties

    8. Re:In related news... by Blkdeath · · Score: 3, Interesting
      but it is ironic that they will usually carry games where you can KILL others but the minute you show some one naked it's vulger.
      It's a really strange, and sad state of affairs here in North America. The human body is considered something to cover up, to be ashamed of. But to kill people or speak of mass killing/death is almost acceptable dinner conversation. (Discussing the evening news is relatively commonplace, and more often than not the news involves killing of some form or another. "If it bleeds, it leads." after all).

      I'm thinking part of the reason for teenaged pregnancies and STD spreads is the taboo placed on sex.

      While I think gratuitous, promiscuous sex (hookers? Pimps?) is a little much, especially for a game intended for wide-spread use, I don't think it's any worse than maiming and killing other players.

      {insert obligatory 'video games relating to children killing people, etc.' banter here}

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    9. Re:In related news... by fliplap · · Score: 5, Informative

      Screw fileshack, they want you to WAIT for the download to start. They actually have queues, the wait time right now is at least 12 minutes. Why not get the trailer directly from the bmx xxx site. Its embedded in a page but here's the URL it pulls the mpg from:

      http://209.10.163.130/aux/bmxxxx/movies/mpg_01.m pg

    10. Re:In related news... by digitalsushi · · Score: 2
      "If it bleeds, it leads."


      Poor Kelsey... that was the first time I ever heard something turn into an annoying phrase before it was done being said for the very first time.

      --
      slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
    11. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mindless I agree with.

      But for the record: Which is more likely to harm you guns or STDs?

      Just asking

    12. Re:In related news... by Genjurosan · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's the argument that Larry Flynt had, and still has for years. Ever see the movie about his life with Woody Harrelson? The People vs. Larry Flynt, quite a good movie.

    13. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell us...

      Was your /.ing their poor little server really worth the karma?

    14. Re:In related news... by F34RL3SS+L34D3R · · Score: 0

      We have to support the ENDLESS war somehow. Getting millions of young, mindless, game playing drones addicting to killing one another is the best recruitment a society could every dream of.

      Professional assassination, is the highest form of public service.

    15. Re:In related news... by gnovos · · Score: 3, Funny

      So the message to the youth... making love is bad. Killing is good.

      Darwinism in action.

      --
      "Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
    16. Re:In related news... by rotre · · Score: 3, Funny

      What red blooded male doesent like sports + nudity + pimps + hookers + weapons..

      don't forget main characters. they really complement the full-action nudity.

    17. Re:In related news... by fliplap · · Score: 1

      Does it hurt to be wrong this often, or are you used to it by now?

      Search results for: 209.10.163.130

      Globix Corporation GLOBIXBLK3 (NET-209-10-0-0-1)
      209.10.0.0 - 209.11.223.255
      Acclaim Entertainment IP002407-209-10-163 (NET-209-10-163-128-1)
      209.10.163.128 - 209.10.163.143

      # ARIN Whois database, last updated 2002-10-14 19:05
      # Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's Whois database.

      If you're going to troll, at least fess upto your trolliness and don't post AC

    18. Re:In related news... by cicatrix1 · · Score: 2

      Is your tinfoil hat still securely in place?

      --

      I know more than you drink.
    19. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that supposed to be a slam against people who warez shit? Why didn't you just finish it off and say some more bullshit about "postage-stamp sized movies" that are transferred over the net?

      Yes, I realize it looks like I'm taking offense at the "lonely guy" bit of your post, but it was actually the slow transfer part that seemed silly.

    20. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fileshack is usually way fast but they had an exclusive on the Need For Speed demo today and got crushed.

    21. Re:In related news... by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 2, Funny
      Seriously, the trailer makes it worth a rent at minimum... What red blooded male doesent like sports + nudity + pimps + hookers + weapons.. Especially in digital form!

      If I want Nudity + pimps + hookers + weapons/sports, I'll download porn.

      --
      I do security
    22. Re:In related news... by Dalcius · · Score: 2

      "{insert obligatory 'video games relating to children killing people, etc.' banter here}"

      I'm too damn lazy to fetch the link, but I hope you don't mean this -- there are many reputable studies to prove otherwise.

      I'm not just a supporter, I'm a case study.

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    23. Re:In related news... by enjo13 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Keep in mind that teenage pregnancy and the number of sexually active teenagers has actually steadily decreased over the last 50 years.

      In the meantime we have actually identified many diseases as STD's that used to be attributed to things like hygeine. Many experts beleive that the actual rate of STD contraction is way down.

      In the meantime the sexual demeanor of the nation has become steadily more liberal... Its a long process, but I think your right. There is a definite correlation between the two..

      --
      Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
    24. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well geting a gun might be a bit hard for a kid, while here he always carrys the tool neccesary for the crime with him.

    25. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If I want Nudity + pimps + hookers + weapons/sports, I'll download porn.

      I want to know what newsgroups you subscribe to.

    26. Re:In related news... by cenobita · · Score: 4, Interesting

      interestingly enough, each and every one of these retailers comes out as a hypocrite in this.

      just yesterday, i walked into wal-mart and bought a copy of GTA3 for PS2. no ID, no huge warning label, nothing. here we have a game that caused such a huge furor, with it's mass amounts of violence and criminal themes, not to mention hookers, pimps, and drugs..purchased from a company that has, time and again, supposedly "put their foot down" on this kind of thing.

      $10 bucks says that if this game gets popular, you can expect to see retailers who once claimed they would never tolerate that kind of thing, stocking it in droves to get a slice of the profit. this whole issue comes down to profitability and giving a good marketing face. if the game doesn't look like it's going to be a big seller, it's easy to say "we won't carry this!", because nobody gives a shit either way. turn the tables, though, and not carrying it means a large loss of potential profits.

      i can't think of a single retailer who would actually stand behind a claim of morality even at the risk of losing a lot of money.

      to finish this, though: i don't think the game looks all that entertaining, nor does the prospect of full nudity really appeal to me. if i want to look at naked women, i'll rent a frickin' porno..not a BMX game.

    27. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get a life warez dood... the size of your dick isn't going to get bigger, no matter how many megabytes of the 0day windows software you'll never use.

    28. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the message to the youth... making love is bad. Killing is good.

      Making love?? It seems you don't know what a pimp is.

      so mindless.

      Indeed.

    29. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      interestingly enough, each and every one of these retailers comes out as a hypocrite in this.

      Are you trying to suggest that Kay-Bee Toys sells GTA3?

      Or by "each and every one" did you just mean Wal-Mart?

    30. Re:In related news... by Ironpoint · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Thats how it works in life because of the survival instinct.

      Killing promotes survival. Being able to kill well means better survival. Survival is good. What do we have soldiers for? To kill for us. However, killing is only ok to a person if it promotes their personal survival. Killing terrorists ok, killing schoolchildren BAD, Killing someone elses schoolchildren, not as BAD (unfortunately). Killing my dentist is BAD for me, killing someone elses dentist, "Who cares"

      (Note, I don't condone killing, The above is just an example of inner subconscious thought)

      On the other hand, People who oppose nudity have instictive fear it may hamper their ability to mate. If we were at a more primitive level, the same male humans that won't tolerate nudity in front of a crowd, would screw like bunnies given a naked female all to themselves with no one knowing about it.

      Churches should be call social pressure concentrators. Sex is really the cardinal sin in religion. I would go as far to say it is the fundamental reason the human mind has created churches. The goal is to lock other "competitors" out of the gene pool. Then we find at the top of these organizations a systematic characteristic of sexuality far beyond the norm, such as molestations or harems in some cultures. The fact that David Koresh molested the females in his cult was by design. The fact marriages are (in conservative environments) carried out (approved) by religious leaders in churches is by design.

      Sex is more rewarding when done on the sly, because If its opposed by church/angry father/husband then that means that the person is winning the survival of the fittest battle to "spread it around".

      "So the message to the youth... making love is bad. Killing is good."

      Well, the subconscious message is "The less nudity you see the more likely you won't mate, upping my chances, Killing is good as long as your killing for me or someone who helps me survive"

    31. Re:In related news... by genrader · · Score: 0

      GTA 3 is okay, I sort of like it. BMX XXX is sick. And I'm a green blooded male Vulcan, not a red blooded human male.

    32. Re:In related news... by Blkdeath · · Score: 3, Insightful
      i can't think of a single retailer who would actually stand behind a claim of morality even at the risk of losing a lot of money.
      The issue at stake here, as I see it, is that WalMart is interested in not offending their primary customer base simply to attract a few teens and 20/30-somethings who'll want to buy this one video game. WalMart, for the most part, has a "wholesome" image (or atleast that's the one they shove down our faces in the commercials) and that image is designed to attract the 'happy housewives' of the nation, along with mothers and grandmothers, along with sweet, innocent teenaged girls {nyuk} interested in such strange activities as "power shopping" or some such.

      So in short, they're perfectly free to stand behind their morality issue in order to keep the majority of their customer base happy. Losing a few hundred thousand dollars on the sales of one video game is nothing compared to losing a few thousand customers in disgust.

      Working in a retail environment, I can tell you that unhappy customers do tell many, many people about how pissed off they are. When it's a huge conglomerate like WalMart they tend to get more incensed and get the media involved. I'm sure they don't want that kind of bad press - bad press that could wind up costing them millions.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    33. Re:In related news... by tswinzig · · Score: 4, Funny

      but it is ironic that they will usually carry games where you can KILL others but the minute you show some one naked it's vulger.

      Not only that, but Wal-Mart is the only national chain I know of that continues to sell all sorts of guns and ammunition (mostly shotguns and rifles).

      BTW, it is NOT funny to go into Wal-Mart and tell them you need more .223 ammo, "because you ran out."

      Trust me!

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    34. Re:In related news... by pmz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sex is really the cardinal sin in religion.

      Not all religions. I believe that some Taoist/Buddhist sects regard sex as a spiritual exchange of Yin and Yang between male and female partners. In their philosophy, it actually makes very good sense.

      It is really a Christian/Islamic oddity in the world that nudity and sex are so taboo.

    35. Re:In related news... by valkraider · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but Wal-Mart is the only national chain I know of that continues to sell all sorts of guns and ammunition (mostly shotguns and rifles).

      K-Mart also...

      BTW, it is NOT funny to go into Wal-Mart and tell them you need more .223 ammo, "because you ran out."

      Why else would you need more .223 ammo? You are right. It's not funny. What would be funny is to run into WAL MART, hysterically ranting, and saying you need more ammo cause you dropped yours while jumping over the fence...

      Of course that would be if you still shopped at WAL-MART. WAL-MART has destroyed too many small towns for me to give them any more money... Besides, the Waltons already have enough.

    36. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently, the subtle differences between fucking a whore and making love are lost on the general public.

      You do realize you can go to just about any museum in America and see plenty of nude art...yes - art. Naked whores on bikes with pimps, is not art, and I don't disagree with anyone who doesn't want to carry that crap. I wouldn't want it either. Not everyone has a the demented and horny 15-year-old guy mentality. It's their right to try to sell the garbage I suppose....but the sellers have the right to decide what they want in their own fucking store. (As do their shareholders, who are likely to agree...) If you don't like that about American culture, could ya fucking move already? Your outnumbered here...get over it.

      It's like rights don't exist on the other side of the fence, when thinking slashdot-style.

    37. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, that story you linked to is just pathetic. You could at least try to be a little funny.

    38. Re:In related news... by tswinzig · · Score: 2

      K-Mart also..

      Not true... as the local gun shop informed me, K-Mart stopped selling guns and ammo when "they went liberal."

      Luckily we don't have many K-Mart's around here, so I can't verify.

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    39. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kmart(big K) does in fact still sell guns in MA.

    40. Re:In related news... by cenobita · · Score: 2, Insightful

      if that's the case, then why have multiple claims been made over the years about not carrying games that largely feature vulgarity and violence? i dunno about the wal-mart stores in your area, but i've never really gotten the "wholesome family image" from them..mostly just an overwhelming urge to vomit, based on the sheer density of morons, rednecks, and white trash that populate the store.

      you are right about one thing, though, in that their goal seems to be to *try* to attract the "happy housewives" and families. however, this goes hand in hand with making more money, because a large percentage of gamers consists of kids between age 13 all the way up for people in their 40's. fathers and kids play the games.

      sure, they're free to stand behind morality in an attempt to keep customers happy..but i don't see it happening anywhere except for their commercials. if they really stood behind it, they wouldn't carry games like GTA3. this goes back to my original point, though: as long as standing against the game is more profitable than actually selling it, they'll stick by it.

      i worked in retail for about 2 1/2 years as an assistant manager at blockbuster.. i dealt with more "unhappy" customers in that period of time than i ever care to again. however, i can also tell you that no matter how pissed a customer got, regardless of the reason..they still came back, time and time again..but why? many of them were so angry, there were instances of the following:

      1.) a customer kicked, and broke, our out-door, all because of a late fee.

      2.) a customer threw a movie at one of my clerks, because of a late fee.

      3.) a customer screaming at me that i'm a fucking idiot, because our VCR units were all rented out. in turn, i screamed something back at him, and told him to get the fuck out until he could act like a rational person.

      each and every single one of them came back again, despite their previous displeasure.

      through all of this, NO ONE complained about our rather large selection of soft porn and violent video games. even soccer moms.

      while it's very true that bad press can hurt a company, it's all short term. the average customer does just that: they consume. their thirst for product or a good deal is greater than their personal code of ethics and morality, and in the end, their wallet determines where they shop..not their conscience.

    41. Re:In related news... by cenobita · · Score: 1

      kay-bee was the only one i wasn't sure about, since i don't shop there..most of their stores in the area i'm from have gone out of business rather quickly. to answer your second question, no, i didn't just mean wal-mart..but i also didn't just mean GTA3. violence and obscenity is nothing new in video games..it's been an issue since the early days of mortal kombat, thrill kill, and splatterhouse. with the exception of thrill kill, i haven't seen any of these games hit any real, significant roadblocks in distribution or sales. to add to that, people do seem to get sick of a game based on a gimmick sooner or later..mortal kombat started to really lose people's interest around MK3 and definitely Mk4.. despite the interest it carried to both consumers and politicians, people eventually forget and move on. so it will be with GTA3 and so it will be with this BMX game. of course, i'm one of those people who still thinks games like Fallout 2 and System Shock 2 are some of the greatest games ever made, and the public at large probably never even knew about them..

    42. Re:In related news... by Anonymous+Cow+herd · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sex is really the cardinal sin in religion.

      For the large part, even in western religions such as Christianity and Catholocism, this isn't true... the cardinal sin is "Lust", which is a difference. This is why most of the rest of the world doesn't care about boobies on statues of women, whereas in America we have to "protect the children" by hanging drapes over them. Hooray for the tyrrany of the soccer moms.

      --
      Ita erat quando hic adveni.
    43. Re:In related news... by Tassach · · Score: 2
      no matter how pissed a customer got, regardless of the reason..they still came back, time and time again..but why?
      Probably because Blockbuster has mercilessly driven nearly every independent video store out of business. It's not that they wanted to be your customer, it's that they had no choice.

      Case in point: there are three Blockbuster outlets within 5 miles of my home. The nearest competing chain store (Hollywood) is 15 miles away. The only surviving independent video rental store I know of is over 20 miles away.

      their thirst for product or a good deal is greater than their personal code of ethics and morality, and in the end, their wallet determines where they shop..not their conscience.

      For many people, the question isn't where they can shop, but if they can shop. Customer choice only works when the customer actually HAS a choice to make. Going without something is an entirely different proposition than paying more or going somewhere else.
      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    44. Re:In related news... by King_TJ · · Score: 2

      Hey, I just modded you up, because your viewpoint is pretty interesting - and doesn't just mimic the same old stuff I read over and over on these issues.

      On the other hand, I really think the "killing good, but sex bad?" question is much more easily explained when it comes to video games.

      The bottom line is, games require action, excitement, and plain old fun, or else they're just not any good. Ever since most of us were little kids, we liked playing with toy guns. (Most of us probably owned a squirt gun, or a cap pistol, or something....)

      There's a since of "power" that comes with holding a gun (even if it's just a toy one, and you're playing imaginary games using it). It also requires practice and skill to become good at shooting.

      This seems like a perfect formula to translate into the "virtual world", as a shooting game. Since it's obviously computer-generated anyway, why not experiment with dropping the player into situations that you wouldn't *really* want to be stuck in, in real life? (EG. Fighting off the "bad guys" in the middle of a war.) You get all of the excitement, all of the potential glory of victory, and none of the negatives (such as real people dying!).

      On the other hand, dropping sex into games generally does little to nothing for their "fun value". Whether you're talking about "true love" or plain old "lust", it's all about two people arousing and stimulating each other. When this is reduced to showing you animated drawings of naked people, much is lost. At best, an extremely well-rendered sexual image of a member of the opposite sex might get you a bit "stimulated", but you're simply going to desire a real person afterwards. The game itself isn't ultimately going to "do anything for you".

      Games are supposed to serve as escapes from reality -- not reminders of things you want/desire but can't/don't currently have.

    45. Re:In related news... by Blkdeath · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I'm going to have to agree with Tassach here; WalMart has far more competition (atleast in Canada) than does a BlockBuster. When you're talking movie stores in most of Durham, you find either BlockBuster or Rogers Video. Independant stores are slowly, methodically driven out of their locations to the point where a 30km radius will have six large chains and one indy.

      WalMart, however, has to contend with the likes of Zellers, Sears, Canadian Tire, Home Depot (for their hardware sections), and several other retail outlets. They're not in a safe enough position to tell their customers to go somewhere else if they don't like it, and gratuitous sex/nudity seems to be a really hot button for a lot of otherwise (seemingly) amoral customers.

      And like it or not, gamers are still a small segment of a very, very large society. Typical lower- and middle-class people looking for a bargain on towels and garden rakes make for a much larger segment, and until gamers account for more than 25% of their overall profits (or some other outrageous figure), I doubt they'll put "hookers and pimps" above the wishes of their target market.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    46. Re:In related news... by coene · · Score: 2

      Yep, and I upgraded it to have a 14mbit wireless uplink to my Xbox.

    47. Re:In related news... by cenobita · · Score: 1

      conceded :> i personally don't even go to Blockbuster anymore. my girlfriend and i only rent from www.greencine.com now, since we're so close to the bay area, and we watch virtually nothing but anime/foreign/horror/indie/etc stuff.

    48. Re:In related news... by cenobita · · Score: 1

      as with tessach, i'll give you that original point..i've never heard of rogers video, though. however, i don't agree at all that gamers make up such a small segment of the population. the video game industry, over the last 10 years, has gone from being predominantly a niche market, to a multi-billion dollar industry that rivals hollywood. you can't tell me that revenue and marketing of that magnitude is an isolated business. hell, even my mom's 50-year old boyfriend plays them..albeit crappy games, but he still plays :p

    49. Re:In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently, the subtle differences between fucking a whore and making love are lost on the general public. Naked whores (...) that crap

      You seem to have some anger directed at courtesans (a.k.a. providers of sexual services, prostitutes, whores ... the difference between the terms mostly reflecting the writer's attitudes).

      The US is unusual in prohibiting sexual services. Had you lived in some other country you might have learned that there is less difference between making love and "fucking a whore", as you put it, that you suppose. Paying for sex does not preclude tenderness.

    50. Re:In related news... by TomServo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      http://www.kbtoys.com/genProduct.html?PID=1051868& ctid=19&ls=default

      I realize their website is not the store, but I really don't feel like driving down Pico in lunchtime traffic to go find this out for you. Either way, it's Kay-Bee Toys selling GTA3.

      In addition, eToys.com was bought by Kay-Bee toystores after their bankruptcy in January of 2000. Bastards didn't even use the code we wrote either, though they did pay a whole lotta money for it ;) They're selling GTA Vice City along with kbtoys.com.

      http://www.etoys.com/genProduct.html?PID=1891839 &c tid=19&ls=vgames

    51. Re:In related news... by Blkdeath · · Score: 2

      Sorry; I forgot my tags. ;)

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    52. Re:In related news... by TomServo · · Score: 1

      I'm an idiot that should use the preview button.

      KB Toys - GTA3

      eToys.com - GTA Vice City

    53. Re:In related news... by TomServo · · Score: 1

      K-Mart agreed to phase out the selling of at least handgun ammunition after a campaign by Michael Moore and two victims of the shooting at Columbine High School. It's documented in the movie "Bowling for Columbine", released last Friday in New York & Los Angeles.

    54. Re:In related news... by Ironpoint · · Score: 1

      I see what you mean.

      After I posted that I started thinking about the example of Scientology, who's social agenda seems to be focused around money and power instead of moral issues. I guess Different religions and cultures are trying to accomplish different things.
      Eastern countries used to have a lot of arranged marriages, especially higher up in society. They just didn't attribute this to a religious practice.

      I suspect older Eastern socieites had little problem with a male having dozens of female partners. But It probably had a problem with a female who would have dozens of male partners in different societies. The males are sent out to spread the genes, the females are the receivers. And once the society has approved a marriage, like in Christian or Muslim societies, all bets are off, and now the society wants the couple to have as many babies as possible.

    55. Re:In related news... by Ironpoint · · Score: 1


      It just seems that way because Lust is talked about by preachers every Sunday. Sex out of wedlock (approval) is too heinous to be talked about in church very much.

  2. Some places sell it by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is all that Playboy and Penthouse software on the top shelf of the computer software section at Hastings...

    1. Re:Some places sell it by MadKeithV · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I prefer playing with my girlfriend's software anyway ;)

    2. Re:Some places sell it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I prefer her wetware; I'm the intellectual kinda guy.

  3. Ooooh by Guitarzan · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Let me be the first of many to say, "I'm so completely surprised at this."

    Hmm, I didn't sound too convincing there, did I?

  4. What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by name_already_in_use · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That was vulgar and featured nudity and everybody loved it. No stores, as I recall, refused to sell that. Still I suppose the graphics have come a little since those days, perhaps it is the realism that shocks them.

    --


    Rake Free + Mac Poker: CardCrusade
    1. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by no+soup+for+you · · Score: 3, Informative
      But with Leisure Suit Larry you had to prove your age by answering questions to prove your age. Answer them correctly, and the blinds would rise all the way

      oh, and you had to wait for the '91 remake to get 256 colors. Like you said, not exactly the realism you'd get today

      --
      If you blog it...
    2. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Nuclear+Fr0g · · Score: 0

      You forget that Leisure Suit Larry asked you questions before you got to play it to ensure you were over 18 years old. They should ask you the same questions from the original from 1987 to ensure absolutely no one underage plays it.

    3. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what exactly were those questions? examples!

    4. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by 4444444 · · Score: 2

      Does anyone else here remember the original text adventure "soft porn"? they added graphics and called it leisure suite larry

      --

      http://Lenny.com
      4 great justice!
    5. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i could get the questions right if I told them I was 50, but not if I told them I was 21. (this was when I was about 7 or 8) funny huh? I don't think i ever understood how to play either. I was too busy wackin' it into a stuffed animal version of Grimace!

    6. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by name_already_in_use · · Score: 1

      True, it did ask questions to verify you were old enough, I had forgotten that. I also forget what those were, but I do remember that when I played it I was only 10 years old, so they can't have been that taxing. But I see your point in that there should be a level protection against younger players playing, but age rating standards were not really around then and they are now, so I guess this 'masterpiece' from Acclaim must R rated or something?

      --


      Rake Free + Mac Poker: CardCrusade
    7. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      Yep...it was Time Magazine's review of Softporn that put Sierra on the map.

      rj

    8. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by astrosmash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't forget Strip Poker for the Apple ][. Of course, I only played it because the game play was good.

      Anyway, I don't think Wal-Mart wasn't around back then. If they had been around I'm sure they wouldn't have carried those types of games.

      So, Wal-Mart sucks, and toy stores like Toys-R-Us are generally for kids so it's no surprise that they won't carry any 'pr0n' games either. I don't think it's a big deal.

      --
      ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
    9. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by no+soup+for+you · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Careful what you wish for... following is a list of Q and A from the Leisure Suit Larry I Quiz.

      Spoiler alert -- contains answers!!!

      "Tiptoe Through the Tulips" was recorded by c Tiny Tim
      "Where's the..." c beef?!
      A nehru jacket is b out of date
      Bourbon Street is in d New Orleans, Louisi
      Calvin Klein is c a clothing designer
      Captain Kangaroo's sidekick was d Mr. Greenjeans
      Charlie McArthy and d Edgar Bergen
      Does a pair of queens beat 3 deuces? a Yes, in Blackjack
      Herb Alpert and the ____ Brass? a Tijuana
      How many molecules are there in a glass of water? d as many as there ar [sic]
      I find computer games with adult content b acceptable
      If a physician were on an island with Bo Derek, he would thank God If Bo Derek were here, I'd ask her to d stop playing comput
      It's not nice to fool b mother nature
      Joe Dimaggio played b Baseball
      Lee Harvey killed c John F. Kennedy
      Mohammed Ali is c a professional boxe
      Peter Piper picked pickled c peppers
      Sergent Pepper was c the leader of the l
      The largest state is b Alaska
      The last name of Annette (on the Mickey Mouse Club) was c Funicello
      The most effective form of birth control is a abstinence
      The most likely place to find virgins is c St. Mary's Girl's S
      The most populous city in the US is c New York
      The result of Watergate was c Richard Nixon quit
      Utah is full of d none of the above
      When playing Monopoly you b must own 4 houses b
      Which is non-alcoholic c Perrier
      Which is not a car? d Toshiba
      Which is not a cheese? d Reisling
      Which is not a city in Mexico? c San Diego
      Which is not an American armed force? d the national league
      Which is not in Hawaii? c Fiji
      Who has not been US attourney general? b Sam Shepard
      Who is buried in Grants tomb? d Mrs. Grant
      Who was not a famous musician? d Tom Garvey
      Who was not a politician? c W.C. Fields
      Who was not an astronaut? a John Milton
      Who was the leader of Nazi Germany? d Adolf Hitler
      Who wrote "To be or not to be"? a Will. Shakespeare

      My compiments to google (as always) and Ken's cheats?

      --
      If you blog it...
    10. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Kraegar · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ask the man himself, Al Lowe, creator of the series.

    11. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by mmol_6453 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course, I only played it because the game play was good.

      Right...and I only read Playboy for the articles.

      Wait...I'm 19, and I've never seen a Playboy. What's wrong with me?!

      (scrambles out the door)

      --
      What's this Submit thingy do?
    12. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What ever happened to Virtual Valerie? Now THERE was a waste of programming talent!

    13. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by astrosmash · · Score: 2
      Yep...it was Time Magazine's review of Softporn that put Sierra on the map.
      Here's some more info on softporn.

      Ken Williams, Sierra's founder, swears that at a time when Apple had only sold 100,000 Apple ][ computers, Sierra had sold 25,000 copies of Softporn.

      But soon thereafter, Sierra had the chance to acquire the software rights for all the Walt Disney characters...if they dropped that "nasty" game from the catalog. So of course they did.


      The more things change, the more they stay the same.
      --
      ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
    14. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Wait...I'm 19, and I've never seen a Playboy. What's wrong with me?!

      You are a nerd. That's what is wrong.

    15. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Issue9mm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Y'know... one of the things I'm tired of having to do is defend the quality of Playboy articles.

      They're pretty fucking good!

      Yeah, I was lured in by the pictures, but it wasn't until I actually read an issue that I subscribed.

      Besides, if nothing else, there's a Playboy equivalent to a "Your Rights Online" kind of thing, which is worth the price of the subscription.

      -9mm-

    16. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your a closeted homosexual? =p

      not intended to be horribly offensive, my best friend is gay, just light humor.

    17. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait...I'm 19, and I've never seen a Playboy. What's wrong with me?!
      >>>>>

      You read /. ?

    18. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by ajd1474 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I believe you... no really i do.

      Anyone who has access to the internet and still buys Playboy really MUST be reading the articles, why else would you by it?

      Unless you are wallpapering or something of course...

      --
      I refuse to have a sig... dammit!
    19. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Loligo · · Score: 2

      >But with Leisure Suit Larry you had to prove
      >your age by answering questions to prove your
      >age.

      As I recall, Leather Goddesses of Phobos (Infocom) had something similar, though I can't recall dates for which came out first.

      -l

    20. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And you will quickly realize... the articles are what make it good.

      Oh yeah, there's some hot chicks in there, but you can see hot chicks stuffing themselves with dongs or being stuffed with dongs in other magazines, playboy just has chicks pretending like they're turned on. I'd rather see them getting their poop chute turned inside out, which is why I love the internet.

      Seriously, Playboy has righteous articles. That's why there's a braille edition. The interviews, in particular, are some of the best, or at least have been.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    21. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Timmeh · · Score: 4, Funny
      OH HELL NO. I can't believe they'd use a video game to force that anti-Oswald bullshit on us! EVERYONE knows it was the mafia in concert with cuban dictator Fidel Castro, Local 502 - Circus Clown Union, and the Jews, always the Jews....

      twajs....

    22. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Orthanc_duo · · Score: 1

      Brute-forced my way through those in my younger days... and it hasn't warped me too badly...

    23. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Kynde · · Score: 2

      Careful what you wish for... following is a list of Q and A from the Leisure Suit Larry I Quiz.

      You're missing few questions. I distinctly recall a question "East coast is ..." home of the Mets.

      You're also missing the fact that most, if not all, questions had TWO correct answers.

      --
      1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
    24. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1
      In the original version, I don't recall levels of nudity. (Larry III had them for sure)
      I don't know exactly how old I was when I played the EGA version of Larry, but I'm pretty sure it was around 12, and I wrote just all questions down with the anwers and marked the correct answer down as soon as I knew it.

      Of course, much later, I heard of "Alt-X". I still enjoyed the questions, it was half of the fun!

      And Larry Laffer probably retired to some tropical island and has that gorgeous babe called Patti on his lap. Lucky bastard!

    25. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I know this is shocking, but playboy really does have some good articles, that's why most university libraries subscribe to it, and why the articles are catalogued in the computerized article search database things.

      Yah, it also has some fairly attractive mostly naked chicks, but I can't imagine anybody over the age of 14 would choose playboy for porn, it's so tame.

    26. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are gay.

    27. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by maw · · Score: 2
      During my first year of university someone bought that game. I pointed out that it wasn't porn, and for some reason, this really bothered him.

      I took advantage of that fact.

      Me: "Hey guys, watch this, I'm going to get a rise out of Frank!"
      Frank: "No you're not."
      Me: "Frank, you know that Leisure Suit Larry isn't porn, right?"
      Frank: "Goddamnit #!%!^#^%^%!$%#@ IT IS NOT PORN!"

      It would probably work to this day, some 6 years later.

      --
      You're a suburbanite.
    28. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Am I the only guy who ever used to READ Playboy? They used to have some great writers working with them - Bradbury, Clarke, Dan Greenburg, Mailer are just a few who come to mind. And of course the cartoons, and of course, Kurtzman and Elder's Little Annie Fanny. This was all many, many years ago of course...

    29. Re:What ever happened to Leisure Suit Larry? by teknofile · · Score: 0

      On Al Lowe's webpage [http://www.allowe.com] there is a link to a interview [http://games.applelinks.com/moofie2001/al4.shtml] where he talks about Wal-Mart and censorship in LSL7.

      --
      http://www.teknofile.org/
  5. slashdot grammar by bo-eric · · Score: 5, Funny
    [...]with prostitutes and pimps and main characters


    Prostitutes and pimps - sure, but main characters? Won't somebody please think of the children?
    --

    -- Free speech is only free if your time is worth nothing.
    1. Re:slashdot grammar by Wire+Tap · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Prostitutes and pimps - sure, but main characters? Won't somebody please think of the children?

      No no no. That simply will not do.

      Who would protect the children at the end of the day, if the terrorists have already won in this post-September 11th world where people are preaching to the converted about what Jesus would do in the post-Columbine atmosphere where CowboyNeal is the funk King of Michigan?

      Yes. Much better.

      --

      Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains.

    2. Re:slashdot grammar by NeMon'ess · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People who submit articles should proof-read them more carefully because the audience is far greater. If you leave the house with mis-matched socks, expect jokes to be made at your expense. Double check your appearance and writing and there won't be any problems.

    3. Re:slashdot grammar by hazyshadeofwinter · · Score: 1

      output of JonKatzOMatic (c)2002 VA Systems/Slashdot Inc. Use only by permission.

      --
      Click here if you just like to click on shit.
    4. Re:slashdot grammar by JonnyElvis42 · · Score: 1

      Prostitutes and pimps - sure, but main characters? Won't somebody please think of the children?

      I'm sorry, but it's too late for that. Blockbuster video has been renting R rated movies containing thematic elements for years.

    5. Re:slashdot grammar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of one of my favorite Penny Arcades.

    6. Re:slashdot grammar by Cryptnotic · · Score: 2

      Obviously you have never submitted an article. To get an article on the front page, you have to submit it at least several times. One editor will read it and call it trash and reject it. So then you resubmit it. Another editor will see it and think it is brilliant and post it to the front page. If the article author is smart, he will save his text somewhere in a file on his computer. Otherwise he will need to quickly retype the article from memory, most likely introducing typos.

      --
      My other first post is car post.
  6. Traditional game content by Monkelectric · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "We're not going to carry any software with any vulgarity or nudity -- we're just not going to do it"

    The walmart spokesman cleared his throat and continued, "The staple of gaming content has always been VIOLENCE. Sure, we'll sell games where you can watch someone get their head cut off, THATS good clean fun."

    --

    Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    1. Re:Traditional game content by Thalia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why are you surprised? The same ratings scheme applies on television. If it's just people getting shot, well then the kiddies can watch no problem. If it's nudity, that's a problem. If it's MALE nudity, then it belongs on the triple-X channel only. Americans are a puritan bunch... and the puritans did approve of killing people (remember, they burned witches for entertainment value)... just not of sex.

      Thalia

    2. Re:Traditional game content by G-funk · · Score: 2

      Hehehe.... Americans and their nudity.

      Come to Australia, and visit bondi (or any major Sydney) beach (ugh I'd rather not, but I live in Queensland so I'm lucky)... You'll find 80% of the women strutting around topless. Try that in califorina, and you go to jail... I just can't believe it. Legally, on the start-time / content scale of television in the US, you can see a nipple be pierced, before you can see it be licked.

      Won't somebody please think of the children!

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    3. Re:Traditional game content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's nudity, that's a problem. If it's MALE nudity, then it belongs on the triple-X channel only.


      Take a look at American television sometime. You'll notice that the majority of couples are frumpy men coupled with attractive women. Given those setups, there's good reason we don't want male nudity on television.

    4. Re:Traditional game content by masterkool · · Score: 1
      Here is teh Acclaim information site about BMX XXX. Its kind of humorous they way they try to hype it up. From another site:
      Hilarious scripted events written by Hollywood's best comedians and mind-blowing mature content that you won't believe you're seeing.

      I just hope that I never play a game where I dont believe I'm seeing.
      --
      I once shot a man who posted too many, "Imagine a beowulf cluster of these"
    5. Re:Traditional game content by SSJ2+Labsuit · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Americans are a puritan bunch... and the puritans did approve of killing people (remember, they burned witches for entertainment value)... just not of sex.

      That's not strictly true. The Puritans were a somwhat repressive bunch, like most of the religious colonists of their day, but they weren't quite as prudish as their name makes them sound. They strongly disapproved of sex outside of wedlock -- but once you were married, it was a different story. They believed a healthy sex life was an important component of a successful marriage, to the point where Puritan ministers actually acted as "sex councilors" if things weren't going well! Puritans actually thought that sex was a kind of duty -- if God didn't want you to do it, he certainly wouldn't have given you such a strong sex drive.

      Compared to the "puritanical" groups we have today, the Puritans themselves were pretty sexually liberated.

      As for the killing, well, I think you're pretty much on the nail with that one. But again, that was a widespread problem. For most of human history, life was pretty cheap. Killing for various purposes was a common occurance, despite the fact that every Sunday people told each other not to do it. It is only comparatively recently that the right to life has been well respected.

    6. Re:Traditional game content by CeramicNuts · · Score: 1
      Americans are a puritan bunch... and the puritans did approve of killing people (remember, they burned witches for entertainment value)... just not of sex.
      no no no... non-Americans are just slutty cowards.
    7. Re:Traditional game content by dillon_rinker · · Score: 5, Funny

      and the puritans did approve of killing people (remember, they burned witches for entertainment value)... just not of sex.

      PUH-LEASE!

      How do you think they made little baby Puritans?

    8. Re:Traditional game content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I hope they do end up carrying "Dead or Alive: Bikini Beach Vollyeball", I'd be really saddened if they refused to carry that.

    9. Re:Traditional game content by voidware · · Score: 3, Funny

      So, that's why there are no more Puritans!

    10. Re:Traditional game content by sean23007 · · Score: 2

      Ummm... stole them from the natives who they killed? I'm just fishin' for options here.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    11. Re:Traditional game content by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Games @ my local Wal-Mart

      UT 2003 = Violence
      Diablo 2 = Demonic Stuff
      RTCW = Violence
      Dungeon Siege = Violence
      WarCraft 3 = Violence

      no GTA 3 though....

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    12. Re:Traditional game content by buck_wild · · Score: 2, Flamebait

      If memory serves, they treated it as a dirty, necessary evil. Nobody seemed to enjoy it, and certainly nobody ever talked about it.

      --
      If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
    13. Re:Traditional game content by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 5, Funny

      How do you think they made little baby Puritans?

      Spores, IIRC.

      --
      ± 29 dB
    14. Re:Traditional game content by KnightStalker · · Score: 5, Funny

      My guess would be, clothed except for the important bits, and with averted eyes and lots of guilt and penance afterwards...

      --
      * And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
    15. Re:Traditional game content by jcenters · · Score: 3, Interesting

      To me, it would appear that Americans are afraid of life itself. Think about it: Which is more socially acceptable? Video of someone getting shot or a video of two people fucking?

      Sex is a force that produces life. Violence is a force that induces death.

      So the overall message in our society would appear to be, "Life is bad, death is good!"

      No wonder the world is so screwed up.

      --

      vi ~/.emacs

    16. Re:Traditional game content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They had sex only for procreation, not recreation. Girls probably didn't have orgasms until the 21st century here.

      They didn't really burn witchs for entertainment, it was because they all had the belief that they were something to fear.

    17. Re:Traditional game content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, man, that's, like, really deep.

    18. Re:Traditional game content by 0x0d0a · · Score: 3, Informative

      They hardly killed people for entertainment. And you won't find a single one burned alive, contrary to modern dramatic retellings.

      In total, fewer than twenty people were executed, and all of them were hanged.

      In general, older things like this get more press.

      For example, I'm sure you heard of Jack the Ripper? He killed, at most, three prostitues. Not a match for even the US east coast sniper running around at the moment.

      Ah, well.

    19. Re:Traditional game content by Charm · · Score: 1
      I live in Queensland also known as the sunshine state. Think old tanned bodies topless, not exactly pretty heh.

      --

      --
      -- RTFM:Slackware::Beer:Saturday
    20. Re:Traditional game content by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      Ooops, that was five prostitutes at most, not three. It assumes he was responsible for all of them...the first three were done in a very close timeframe.

    21. Re:Traditional game content by tnak · · Score: 1
      remember, they burned witches for entertainment value


      Actually, no, they didn't. The Puritans hung witches. Nobody was ever burned at the stake for witchcraft on the North American continent. It happened all over Europe, but not here.

      *cynicism*I somehow doubt it had anything to do with the milk of human kindness. The Puritan communities were much closer to the edge of starvation than those in Europe. Hanging was quicker and, therefore, the audience could get back to the necessary tasks of surviving that much quicker.*/cynicism*

    22. Re:Traditional game content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An anatomy lesson may be in order. The frontal nudity of females doesn't really reveal anything because "it" is mostly underneathe. Hard (npi) to hide a penis when it's out in the front row.

    23. Re:Traditional game content by Dean+Sas · · Score: 2

      its quite funny really, in Germany the opposite is true, you get naked people on tv from early on but a lot less violance

    24. Re:Traditional game content by akruppa · · Score: 5, Funny

      >PUH-LEASE!

      >How do you think they made little baby Puritans?

      This I'd like to know as well. It might be the answer to all of our geek problems.

      Alex

      --
      Heisenberg may have been here
    25. Re:Traditional game content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, from what I remember from history class, Puritans were more accepting about sex than you'd think. Pre-marital sex was ok, as long as the couple in question got married eventually (before any children came along). Homosexual sex was bad though, because it was considered "spilling the seed." Killing off potential children I guess. Lesbian sex was supposedly perfectly legal though.

    26. Re:Traditional game content by n3k5 · · Score: 1

      > the Puritans themselves were pretty sexually liberated oh come on! i don't know much about the puritans, but i'm sure that sex was only okay for them as long as they produced children. they were probably as sexually liberated as the pope.

      --
      but what do i know, i'm just a model.
    27. Re:Traditional game content by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • "Sure, we'll sell games where you can watch someone get their head cut off, THATS good clean fun."

      It's good, Biblical fun. Have a look at the Maciejowski Bible sometime. It tells you a lot about Christian - and therefore de facto USian - economic morality (by which I mean: not offending them as has the money). There's a gibbing every second page, but in the adultery scene, Bathsheba has kept her wimple on. I mean, she might be a whore, but she's still got some standards...

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    28. Re:Traditional game content by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1

      ...and that is the reason why I watch german TV all the time.

    29. Re:Traditional game content by G-funk · · Score: 2

      You're just at the wrong place.... I tend to have topless hot young girls in the pool out the back rather often ;-)

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    30. Re:Traditional game content by truenoir · · Score: 1

      I doubt it. Heck, the Bible talks about each spouses body being the others. It gives lust as a reason to get married (rather than be tempted outside marriage). As I've heard it "If God didn't want us to have sex, he would have made it so we just layed eggs!". Maybe they weren't out there revelling in it, but that doesn't mean that they weren't doin' it when the door was closed. AFIAK the ones that have had issue with birth control were the Catholics (and perhaps closely spun off protestants like Lutherans, I dunno).

    31. Re:Traditional game content by Icculus · · Score: 1

      You can do anything through the hole in the sheet.

    32. Re:Traditional game content by CreationLtd · · Score: 1
      It's actually the Victorian era that was responsible for America's current sexual repression/confusion. The concepts of being prim and proper, clothed to the hilt, and hiding all bits of tantalizing flesh can be squarely placed at the Victorians feet.

      Puritans often get the blame and their name is synonymous with sexual repression but look at some of the writings of the Victorian era about women's proper conduct and you'll see exactly whose to blame.

      More sex please, we're British

    33. Re:Traditional game content by japhmi · · Score: 1

      they were probably as sexually liberated as the pope.

      Well, the Pope has been able to not be a slave to his sexual desires for a long time. That sounds pretty sexually liberated to me.

      --
      "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke
    34. Re:Traditional game content by jazmataz23 · · Score: 1

      ROFL

      Hail Eris!

      --
      Death to Argument by Slogan!! (This post twice-encrypted with ROT-13. Replies not using same will be ignored)
  7. What a joke by swagr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Books, comics, movies, tv shows, news and games with violence are everywhere.
    Violence is OK everyone.

    A naked person, though, will destroy the fabric of society as we know it. And s*x, I won't even dare say the word.

    --

    -... --- .-. . -.. ..--..
    1. Re:What a joke by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually it's worse that you think.

      Think about it for a moment; there are only two words you need to mention, to show the bias in the media: "fucking" and "farting".

      You can have a fuck-specialist on the news, who's just written a book about how to fuck, who to fuck, how to feel after you fucked and who you should fuck next. You just don't call it fucking. Hell, look at day-time TV. You know that in that soap-opera you enjoy, all it really revolves around, is did he fuck her, has he fucked her, who else did he fuck, did she fuck someone else and what the fuck is going on.

      But - when was the last time you saw ANYONE even talk about farting? You've never had anyone on the Late Show who's just written a book about how to fart, who to fart at, how to feel after you farted and who you should fart at next.

      Farting is WORSE than fucking! Think about that for a while.

      (With apologies to George Carlin).

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    2. Re:What a joke by cheese_wallet · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Farting is WORSE than fucking!"

      I'm going to have to agree with you there. I'd much rather fuck than fart.

    3. Re:What a joke by f97tosc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I am from Sweden but I have been living in the US for a few years now. In Sweden, violence is censored to a much greater extent than in the US, but for nudity it is the other way around.

      I can see the reasoning behind the ciolence argument (although I am not sure to what extent I agree)

      watching lotsa violence -> violent behavior

      But for nudity...

      watching lotsa nudity -> ???

      Spontanious stripping? Unlikely.

      Will young men start raping girls if they see somebody naked? C'mon.

      Will there be more unprotected sex? No, lack of information has to my knowledge never stopped anyone that wanted to get at it.

      Could somebody with longer time in the US please explain. I really don't get it.

      Tor

    4. Re:What a joke by evilviper · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Insightful huh?

      Last time I checked, I haven't heard about anyone writing a book about stamps appear on TV. By your logic, Stamp collecting must be far-far worse than sex or farting.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    5. Re:What a joke by BeBoxer · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, I haven't seen the author on Letterman yet, but at least Amazon isn't afraid to carry it. The Gas We Pass: The Story of Farts And a childrens book at that! Somebody please think of the children!!! :-)

    6. Re:What a joke by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 2

      But - when was the last time you saw ANYONE even talk about farting? You've never had anyone on the Late Show who's just written a book about how to fart, who to fart at, how to feel after you farted and who you should fart at next.

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Howard Stern's entire career based on talking about farting?

      (okay, okay, he talks about fucking too...)

    7. Re:What a joke by GMontag451 · · Score: 2, Troll
      Will young men start raping girls if they see somebody naked? C'mon.

      You'd be surprised at just how many idiots in this country believe there is a link between you looking at pornography and your propensity to commit sex crimes.

    8. Re:What a joke by evilmrhenry · · Score: 1
      Could somebody with longer time in the US please explain. I really don't get it.

      Sorry. We don't get it either.

    9. Re:What a joke by MBCook · · Score: 2, Informative
      I can tell you what 'lotsa nudity' leads to. I seem to remember hearing that a member of the Swedish government was runing on a platform that at least one channel should be forced to air uncensored porn for 24 hours every saturday or something like that in an effort to increase population. In short:

      Watching lotsa nudity -> "it" -> population

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    10. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it can be expressed much more simply as this:

      People are a lot more likely to have sex than to kill/hurt other people, hence violence is considered less acceptable than nudity.

      Mind you, there are some people who don't much care for either...

    11. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      watching lotsa nudity -> ???
      -> profit?

      lame, I know

    12. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US is at war, it needs soldiers not players.

    13. Re:What a joke by Kashif+Shaikh · · Score: 0

      "Farting is WORSE than fucking!"

      I'm going to have to agree with you there. I'd much rather fuck than fart.


      To some folks, both are good. You'd know these people when their fart smells like Vasaline...

    14. Re:What a joke by JF · · Score: 1

      Sigh, media bias... It couldn't possibly be because no one cares about farting, could it?

      -JF.

    15. Re:What a joke by goon+america · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Could somebody with longer time in the US please explain. I really don't get it.

      I've lived in the US my entire life, and I've never understood it. People here have somehow picked up the idea that naked bodies hurt children, but violence does not.

    16. Re:What a joke by Kintanon · · Score: 2

      If that were true, I'd commit more sex crimes per day than most serial rapists...
      If measuring porn intake were a way to rate someones propensity to commit sex crimes I would certainly have been in jail for the last 4 years.

      Kintanon

      --
      Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
    17. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Part of it also has to do with the fact that some people are rather opinionated and think everyone should think their way is *the* way. These people, for example, political parties, have their various agendas, you know.

    18. Re:What a joke by phutureboy · · Score: 1

      That book is awesome!! One of my friends got it as a gift for another friend a couple holiday seasons ago. I highly recommend it.

    19. Re:What a joke by kamapuaa · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Will young men start raping girls if they see somebody naked? C'mon.

      Interesting article in last week's NY Times magazine: France has seen a large increase in gang rapes, many attribute this to the increasingly widespead avaialabilty of pornography.

      Or as an extreme example, in many Europeans countries, pedophilic books or even pictures/videos are easily available. I've read that people who could otherwise sumblimate such tendencies (as the majority of them do) get involved in sexual addictions to the material, eventually sexually abusing a child.

      Could somebody with longer time in the US please explain. I really don't get it.

      Actually, we do it just to give Europeans something to talk self-righteously about. Americans just love to hear it! What a country!

      Which is just a sarcastic way of saying: don't be simplistic. Different countries have different cultures, sensibilities, and problems, and have to deal with them differently. The US has a huge problem with guns, despite other countries having similar gun laws and rates of ownership, or even more openly violent cultures. If there weren't such differences, there would be only one universal government/moral code/religion/whatever.

      People are still having masturbating in America. Pornography isn't really that hard to find! People still have sex a lot more in movies and TV, than in real life! And I don't think our culture is losing too much, if in order to get a game where topless women ride BMX bikes, you have to order it off Amazon.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    20. Re:What a joke by Bastian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I heard on one of those charlatan pop psychology radio shows (of the Dr. Laura variety) once that fathers should not allow their children to see them naked. For daughters, it is because they would be afraid of their dad's penis, and for sons it would be because they are intimidated by its size.

    21. Re:What a joke by goon+america · · Score: 1

      Sounds like somebody's been smoking out of the same hookah as Dr. Freud...

    22. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason I can come up with is the government wants to reduce the amount of sex that will occur. But, in reality I think bottling it up will make the guys want it more.

      The other part is advertisments and the porn there currently is shows only attractive females. Which I have nothing against, I want more even. But when 50-60% of the population is overweight and will never look that good, they will not want to see it and will be vocal about it.

      The thing that drives me crazy is that they can not show nudity in movies shown on TV. They also cut out or change the dialog which make the movie unwatchable. Then you have to get the DVD to watch the real thing. It is a conspiracy by the MPAA I tell you.

      The last thing is probably the anwser you are looking for. The family structure over here in the USA HATES talking about sex. The parents are ok having sex, but will not talk about it. If I ever got caught reading Playboy, I bet nothing would happen because my parents wouldn't want to talk about it.

    23. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one cares about farting? What the hell is wrong with the world, anyway?

    24. Re:What a joke by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Interesting
      You know, I once cited a study commissioned by the Nixon administration which failed to find a link between pornography and sex crimes. I was much younger then; Now I find it extremely amusing. My english teacher probably thought it was brilliant for someone who chose to argue the devil's advocate point of view to choose something from that funding source.

      Anyway, I think it IS likely to cause spontaneous stripping. People are more readily programmed by television than you think. It puts you into an alpha state. (Boy is it hard to find reasonably reputable links about that!) As such, you are more suggestible (it is similar to the state achieved during hypnosis, though with somewhat different results here, we hope.)

      Now, am I saying that guys are going to run around raping people because they see more porn? No. In fact, some studies have shown just the opposite. If you don't make people feel guilty about sexual urges they're more likely to beat off and get all that tension out of their system. Then they can just beat women up instead of raping them, like good little Americans. Hey, it works for football stars.

      Will there be more unprotected sex? I'm sure there will be more sex, and a certain percentage of it is unprotected. So you could say yes, but probably not. Then again, if you make people horny enough they sometimes skip the protection and move right onto the beast with two backs phase of the evening.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    25. Re:What a joke by Lars+Arvestad · · Score: 2
      I can tell you what 'lotsa nudity' leads to. I seem to remember hearing that a member of the Swedish government was runing on a platform that at least one channel should be forced to air uncensored porn for 24 hours every saturday or something like that in an effort to increase population. In short: Watching lotsa nudity -> "it" -> population

      Right now, the above is labelled as "troll", but it is almost true. In the recent elections, a lesser known woman representing the Christian Democrats (so not in the government), of all parties, had convinced herself that the above logic was true and tried to make that into the party platform. There is currently a growing worry about declinng birth rates in Sweden. Unfortunately for her, her fellow party members where not so happy about her ideas, so she had to resign.

      --
      Reality or nothing.
    26. Re:What a joke by squaretorus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I live in the UK. On Sunday night Channel 4 showed A Clockwork Orange at last - first time on UK TV (other than cable). Very good movie.

      Plenty of violence and nudity and drugs and the old in out in out.

      What did my partner say at the end? "Was there any need for all those tits? Kubrick was a dirty old man wasn't he! No dicks though you notice!"

      No mention of the hefty doses of violence, sinister political activities, etc... just "why so many tits"

      Why do I mention this? Because I think the whole anti-nudity thing boils down to guys not wanting to see other guys dicks on the TV.

      The latest thing to stir up the tabloid is Tipping the Velvet, a BBC period costume drama with healthy doses of girl on girl lesbian action. Complaints to the BBC are all about how LITTLE action there was. Safe. No guys. Everyone wants to watch!

      Equality values are so live, especially in my neck of the woods, that any unequal representation is offensive - particularly if its seen to exploit the ladies. For many, the glimpse of boobs in Fifth Element is more offensive than 'that scene' in Reservoir Dogs. Simply because of the exploitation.

      Also, nudity is often surplus to the plot. Shooting someone in the face brings the plot along, because that character is now dead. Seeing some chicks ass doesn't move the plot alon in the same way most of the time. It's just eye candy. So its easier to look down on and condemn. Which film would make more sense if you saw a penis in it? Which would make less sense without the tits? Without the guns? without the swearing?

      Personally - I'd throw it all in and let people make and show what they want. Clockwork Orange was a good film. Fifth Element was not. Nothing to do with the tit count, gun count, or how many times a big guy says 'Shit!' as someone comes into shot.

    27. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Could somebody with longer time in the US please explain. I really don't get it.

      I've got a different opinion than the others.

      Making pornography a "forbidden" subject makes it more enticing and interesting.

      You know, I prefer regular TV/movies to be relatively deviod of serious sexual material (unless that's the topic). It just makes getting it when you intend to more interesting. IMHO, this is a good thing.

    28. Re:What a joke by panurge · · Score: 1

      In his list of the books in the University of Paris, Francois Rabelais (16th. C) includes the "Ars honesta petandi in societas" which loosely translates as "how to fart politely in public".
      So other societies don't necessarily share modern views on this.

      --
      Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    29. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Interesting article in last week's NY Times magazine: France has seen a large increase in gang rapes, many attribute this to the increasingly widespead avaialabilty of pornography.

      I don't know about France but this has become a problem in Sweden too. The offenders are always children of parents from countries with less respect to women. I guess it's more accepted to blame porn than etnicity.
    30. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i live in holland, and let me tell you
      be glad that you live in such a prude country.

      becouse here in holland where where all suposed to be liberal and what not.
      well i can't think of 1 dutch movie that doesn't have full frontal guy/girl scenes.

      they call it, art, they call it realism.
      i just call it bad movies.

      there is nothing wrong with sex and nudity but i don't think i would want to see hollywood productions featuring such 'realism' /me shudders at the thought of Lord of The Rings seeing gandalf get out of bed. NUDE

    31. Re:What a joke by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • Could somebody with longer time in the US please explain. I really don't get it.

      There's a cult indoctrination text that goes by the name of the "Bible" that might have something to do with it. The USA is indeed one nation under god.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    32. Re:What a joke by BoBaBrain · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Which film would make more sense if you saw a penis in it?

      "The crying game" and that is why they could show "it".
      You still don't need any excuse to show unfettered T-shirt potatoes.

      --
      I am a Karma Library.
    33. Re:What a joke by squaretorus · · Score: 1

      I love the expression 'shirt potatoes'!
      Really
      I do

    34. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it amazes me that people think that 30 seconds of nudity or violence couldn't possibly have any effects on people, when there's a multi-billion dollar industry that is willing to pay $40,000,000 for that same 30 seconds to get into your head on super-bowl Sunday.

      Believe it or not, folks... those ads aren't there for the entertainment value. They actually (yes, seriously) are intended to sell a product. Yet, you'll still find people that argue both sides of the coin, simultaneously.

    35. Re:What a joke by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
      You know, I prefer regular TV/movies to be relatively deviod of serious sexual material

      Same here. It reached a point where every movie had to have the obligatory sex scene. If I want that sort of thing, there is a large volume of the stuff on the net, especially WinMX.

      Maybe with the popularity of the net becoming ever greater, the movie producers might start doing this less. Or maybe more, when they realise how popular sex is...

      PS Am I the only one that thinks that the Vin Diesel film was named XXX to make it next-to-impossible to download over p2p? ;-)

    36. Re:What a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What did my partner say at the end? "Was there any need for all those tits? Kubrick was a dirty old man wasn't he! No dicks though you notice!"


      Two words: PENIS SCULPTURE!
    37. Re:What a joke by GlobalEcho · · Score: 2

      I still remember seeing that movie -- I was sitting behind some tall guy, and missed "it". Of course I didn't know I had missed anything and found the next five minutes very confusing (until I asked my wife what was going on).

    38. Re: What a joke by pjrc · · Score: 2
      Could somebody with longer time in the US please explain.

      That's exact it: Explaining.

      Nothing could be more painful for many American parents than having to actually explain sexual activities to their kids.

    39. Re:What a joke by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 2

      A Clockwork Orange: "Was there any need for all those tits? Kubrick was a dirty old man wasn't he! No dicks though you notice!"

      Huh?

      Did they edit out the scene containing the beating with the enormous phallic sculpture?

    40. Re:What a joke by 95_gst_al · · Score: 1
      Could somebody with longer time in the US please explain. I really don't get it.
      Its all about the bible beaters in the US. Whatever they want/say, we do. I am not against religion, but church crowd around here is crazy. They claim to be so proper and christin, yet they talk about you and label you behind your back. hmm...sounds christian to me. IMO
      --
      When all else fails, piss on it. At least you will feel better in some kind of way.
    41. Re:What a joke by cybaz · · Score: 0

      America is very concerned about minority rights, more so than other nations, simply because we have many more minority groups. Womens right's groups have been able to keep porn out of the mainstream, because it dehumanizes a particular group, which is seen as "unfair". Violence, although not good, is pretty much across the board, which is seen as "fair".

    42. Re:What a joke by joshua404 · · Score: 2

      it's because our culture worships and glorifies death while it condemnds sex as evil. thank the bible.

    43. Re:What a joke by joshua404 · · Score: 2

      well now, mr. film fan, let's not forget that the ratings board in england is way more censorship happy than the US. scenes from the lord of the rings (when lurtz headbutts aragorn) were cut because of those ninnies.

    44. Re:What a joke by tswinzig · · Score: 2

      Insightful huh?

      Yes, Carlin, the person this guy was essentially quoting, has very insightful commentary when it's not taken out of context.

      Last time I checked, I haven't heard about anyone writing a book about stamps appear on TV. By your logic, Stamp collecting must be far-far worse than sex or farting.

      Carlin's original joke, albeit decade(s?) old and not as applicable as it used to be, was that you can talk about fucking on TV as long as you don't call it "fucking." However, you can't even talk about farting on TV.

      Obviously today that is not true so much...

      Personally, I prefer his commentary on prostitution:

      "Selling's legal. Fucking's legal. Why isn't selling fucking legal?!"

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    45. Re:What a joke by humboldt · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked, I haven't heard about anyone writing a book about stamps appear on TV. By your logic, Stamp collecting must be far-far worse than sex or farting.

      Get a life. Stamp collecting damn sure is worse then fucking or farting.

    46. Re:What a joke by NightHwk1 · · Score: 1

      Which film would make more sense if you saw a penis in it?

      Fight Club. It actually had something to do with the story.

    47. Re:What a joke by squaretorus · · Score: 2

      Im pretty sure it was shown uncut!

  8. Double Standard. by The_dev0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can sort of understand why the toy stores won't stock it, but i'm assuming walmart/bestbuy are department stores. If they sell DVD titles (movies) that are R18+ rated, why the double standard for a video game? Did these stores also refuse GTA3 and the forthcoming GTA3:vice-city for their sexual content? It seems a little contradictory to me.

    --
    Never fight naked, unless you're in prison...
    1. Re:Double Standard. by Saxerman · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I can sort of understand why the toy stores won't stock it, but i'm assuming walmart/bestbuy are department stores. If they sell DVD titles (movies) that are R18+ rated, why the double standard for a video game? Did these stores also refuse GTA3 and the forthcoming GTA3:vice-city for their sexual content? It seems a little contradictory to me.

      I would guess that many people have the perception that games are 'for kids' not realizing (or possibly even caring) that many gamers have grown up. As the game attempts to use nudity as a selling point many conservative retailers easily adopt the stance that they will not carry the filthy smut. Tomb Raider games feature an extremely busty main character which is prominently displayed on much of their advertisements but the word nudity or XXX isn't featured anywhere so it slips in under their good taste threshold. These same conservative retailers 'know' that R Rated movies are targeted at adults rather than children, and are therefore safe for sale regardless of content.

      This is very similar to the controversy around the first Heavy Metal movie. As an animated film parents first assume it's for kids and are shocked and disgusted to find R rated content, again not realizing (or caring) what the target audience is.

      --

      A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.

    2. Re:Double Standard. by Mobster75 · · Score: 0

      When I bought GTA3 last December, I bought it at Kay-Bee Toys. It's definitely an adult game, but why's it available in a kids' toy store?

      Although, it was only available behind the counter and they were checking ID's.

      So they're not completely wholesome ;)

      - Mobster75!

  9. Nothing much to see here; carry on by ekrout · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just like one of the posters said on the accompanying message board, this is nothing but capitalism working as it normally does, and working quite well.

    "Developers have the right to make it. Stores have the right to carry it or shun it. We have the right to buy it, ignore it or shop elsewhere."

    Sure, it serves as an eye-popper and conversation piece for news outlets since there's (gasp!) nudity in a video game, but it's not like 99.6% of all 15-year old guys haven't already seen a naked woman on video, in a magazine, or (hopefully ;-D) in person.

    --

    If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
    1. Re:Nothing much to see here; carry on by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 2

      exactly.. I would bet that the issue is entirely capitalism and money.

      In fact, i wouldnt be surprised if they had done market research that said they make MORE money by NOT selling the game, because Joe Churchgoer is so impressed with their moral stance that he buys all his groceries and toys there from now on.

      Sounds like a good business plan for me, especially considering most of the people (like me) that get mad about censorship will just buy the game online or at K-mart and then continue to buy our lawn furniture at Wal-Mart because its convienent, thus giving them business anyhow.

    2. Re:Nothing much to see here; carry on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but it's not like 99.6% of all 15-year old guys haven't already seen a naked woman on video, in a magazine, or (hopefully ;-D) in person.
      Uh, I'm not sure that 99.6% of all Slashdot readers have seen a naked woman in person.

    3. Re:Nothing much to see here; carry on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's not like 99.6% of all 15-year old guys haven't already seen a naked woman on video, in a magazine, or (hopefully ;-D) in person.

      :(

  10. Nor.. by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 2

    do they cary Divi Dead, Critical Point, Tokimeki Check-In!, or any other such game. I hate censorship, but unless you expect these other games to show up at Wal-Mart, this isnt at all newsworthy.
    Besides, I seem to recall reading about a stalker/rapist sim that was in full 3d, I'm pretty sure that had nudity. Go fuck yourself "BMX XXX" bullshit.

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    1. Re:Nor.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That game was discussed in: http://www.freetype.net/features/games/galgame/ - Freetype.Net's article, "Girl Games Come of Age". Interesting read, which I found trying to get documentation on the Freetype2 API.

      -- Curious

  11. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This isn't these stores taking "responsibility", its them acknowledging that the parents who can't police their children properly will shove their responsibility (that of the parents) onto the store. The fact is, if parents were able to actually take care of their children, it wouldn't matter if hard-core pornography was shelved next to Barney cartoons - the kids wouldn't ever actually get access. My parents made it quite clear whenever I was not to be doing something, and when I went behind their backs I was inevitably punished. More importantly, they explained their reasons for each edict, and as a result I respected their decisions as my parents instead of resenting them blindly. Thats the lesson the stores are teaching parents: if you dont take care of your kids, we'll do it for you. Thats plain fucking lazy.

    --
    "Stumble before you crawl"
  12. Not unusual... by Yert · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wal-Mart has a history of selling censored music selections; it's not surprising to hear that they aren't willing to sell a soft-porn version of a game. Especially when you consider that while middle-age men may buy movies at Wal-Mart while the wimmunfolk are shopping; most of the PC and console gamers that buy from Wal-Mart (or K-B, or Toys-R-Us) are under 18.

    That being said, what retailers _are_ going to be selling the uncensored version of the game?

    --
    Truck driver, plumber, Linux systems engineer.
  13. Not a big deal unless its legislated. by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People will do as they want. If stores didnt carry Grand Theft Auto 3, they would be losing out on a good chunk of change.

    If this game gets that popular, then either they will sell it or miss out on the profit.

    I really dont have a problem with things like this unless it is the government (federal, state, or local) saying that something can't be sold in town, state, or country. If Wal-Mart et al want to not sell it, frankly, its their business.

    Of course it is good that the public stays informed... Wal-mart doesnt get my money when I need paper towels any more if they choose to censor this.

    But that their choice, and I imagine plenty of other people who like dirty games will continue to buy their paper towels at Wal-Mart.

    1. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by taperkat · · Score: 1

      If stores didnt carry Grand Theft Auto 3, they would be losing out on a good chunk of change. Sears didn't sell Max Payne, GTA3, but they would sell Medal of Honor. why? because it offered realistic views of death. a death is a death no matter how you cut it.. eesh.

      --
      "But I can't get an ocean that's deep enough for my day..." ~The Frames, "Fitzcarraldo"
    2. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If stores didnt carry Grand Theft Auto 3, they would be losing out on a good chunk of change. Sears didn't sell Max Payne, GTA3, but they would sell Medal of Honor. why? because it offered realistic views of death. a death is a death no matter how you cut it.. eesh.

      Exactly, thats what I mean. And sears lost a little video game revenue by doing so. Whether it was made up by new shoppers proud of Sears' moral stance i'm not sure, but either way, its their decision.

      Not worth bitching over unless you hold Sears stock.

    3. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by ultramk · · Score: 4, Funny

      of course, the real question is, what are you doing with all those paper towels?

      hmmm?

      nevermind. i don't want to know.

      m-

      --
      You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
    4. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

      Yeah and then when you see Walmart has these for 50 cents cheaper you will be back. Trust me. Not shopping at Walmart because of this is stupid. I frankly am glad the took this stance. They website sez the best line....THIS IS BMX??? I think not! It's trash. Simple as that. That's just my opinion.

      --

      Gorkman

    5. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

      I suppose I phrased myself wrong. I'm not boycotting Wal-mart exclusively because of this, which admittedly, i'm not interested in.

      Its their larger idea that censorship + guns = family values that ticks me off enough to take my business elsewhere.

    6. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by Kashif+Shaikh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      People will do as they want. If stores didnt carry Grand Theft Auto 3, they would be losing out on a good chunk of change.

      True. Case in point: Mortal Kombat. It was censored on SNES, but not on the Sega Genesis. Sega made a lot of money and happy customers. Nintendo made a lot of angry customers, but not a lot of money.

      Money has the power to change business dynamics, and after Nintendo saw the resulting loss of sales from the censored Mortal Kombat, they didn't censor any game after that.

    7. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      OK you got some things wrong here. The Guns they sell at Walmart are not AK-47's! Sure you can kill people with it, but most of the folks that would buy a gun there are not going to do that. They are going to shoot a 8 point buck for FOOD! Venison is quite good. Paying 20 bucks or so for a deer tag and when you shoot one you get like 100-200 pounds of good meat is a great deal! Sure it's violent. Some folks hunt because they have to not because they want to. I don't think that hunting for food is bad. I do think hunting just to hunt is a bad thing though. I have a friend who loves to hunt, but more because of what he can do with it then the sheer thrill of it. Sure hunting thrills him, but mostly its because he's going to have a full freezer and not have to buy meat for a winter.

      --

      Gorkman

    8. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

      Money has the power to change business dynamics, and after Nintendo saw the resulting loss of sales from the censored Mortal Kombat, they didn't censor any game after that.

      Exactly, and if the the the trend (polygon boobies) doesn't sell well outside of Wal-mart, then it was never meant to be in the first place.

      However, seing the positive reaction from gamers wallets involving blood, I think tits will do just fine.

      3 cheers for Economics.

    9. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

      Absolutely good points. However, I just don't like guns in any fashion, much like the people who don't like tits in a video game just don't like them.

      We both know hunting rifles cause human death about as much as a pornographic playstation game will causse someone to be a sex offender.

      I *just* dont want guns at my store, and the prude hunters dont want porno at theirs.

      Please don't mistake me for taking the typical high horse here in saying that everyone else is wrong. I understand that I am being as pigheaded about guns as those who scream about Eminem CD's. That is just how i choose to vote with my wallet.

    10. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by rawg · · Score: 1

      They website sez the best line....THIS IS BMX??? I think not! It's trash.

      Boy, you don't know anything about BMXers. This is BMX.

      Personally I think the most BMXers are idiots, but this truly represents the BMX community.

      --
      The above is not worth reading.
    11. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think people who are going to shoot up a crowded room *buy* their guns?

    12. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by shepd · · Score: 1

      >I *just* dont want guns at my store

      Query: Ontario, Canada is swamped with Wal-Mart stores, but local laws prohibit (or so it appears) Wal-Mart from selling them. Knowing this, would you shop at a Wal-Mart there?

      Just a for fun, what-if question. Not to be taken any more seriously than the NRA takes the 2nd amendment. :-)

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    13. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

      Query: Ontario, Canada is swamped with Wal-Mart stores, but local laws prohibit (or so it appears) Wal-Mart from selling them. Knowing this, would you shop at a Wal-Mart there?

      No, I wouldn't, knowing that they sell them elsewhere and in massive quantity all over the continent. And all the profit goes to the same place.

      Take for example Kraft macaroni and cheese. While I love the products of the Kraft division of Phillip Morris (yummy mac+cheese) I don't like the idea that my money funds the same people who pushed tobacco lies on an unsuspecting public for years.

      I'm not going to lie and say i've never shopped at Wal-Mart or for Kraft Mac and Cheese (or even shopped for Kraft Mac and Cheese AT Wal-Mart) but when I have another choice readily at hand, I try and use it.

      I understand that people in small towns sometimes dont have another choice besides Wal-mart, and in all honesty, in that situation my need for video games and food would surpass my need for a gun free america. But in my community I have plenty of other options, so I can afford to avoid Wal-Mart.

    14. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by shepd · · Score: 1

      >While I love the products of the Kraft division of Phillip Morris

      Now that I didn't know.

      It puts a whole new spin on Kraft Dinner, it's Canadian name. I guess I learn something new everyday. Like that smarties aren't always smarties (but even when they're called Rockets they still taste damn good).

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    15. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by gughunter · · Score: 1
      I understand that people in small towns sometimes dont have another choice besides Wal-mart, and in all honesty, in that situation my need for video games and food would surpass my need for a gun free america. But in my community I have plenty of other options, so I can afford to avoid Wal-Mart.

      Heh... I took exactly the same approach to Kmart after they stopped selling handgun ammo. Thus is the balance of the Universe maintained!

    16. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by 2short · · Score: 1

      No, I'm sure they forge them by hand. Of course they buy them. Either directly or from someone else who bought them. Probably a few of them steal them from someone who bought them. Numerous studies have shown rates of gun violence correlate closely with the number of guns around. But we'd better not try to reduce the number of guns around, or we won't have a well regulated militia! All those handguns are essential for defending ourselves against oppressive governments who have freakin bombers and tanks.

    17. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by Noren · · Score: 1
      Numerous studies have shown rates of gun violence correlate closely with the number of guns around.
      Cite? How do you explain Switzerland, which has a very low 'gun violence' rate yet nearly every adult male citizen possesses and maintains a military rifle?
    18. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, fucknut, the number of guns is correlated with the rate of violence, and is a direct result of it. Weapons are the tool, not the motive. The number of cars, however, is much more causally linked to a high rate of death by car accidents. Guns are not a prerequisite for violence, merely a tool for its expression. Fix the real problems.

    19. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *They are going to shoot a 8 point buck for FOOD!*
      *snort* *giggle* Sure they are..the mounted antlers don't mean a damn thing, right?

    20. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

      Fine that's your choice. Depending on where you live, that challenege would be a difficult thing. Prime example is that everywhere in Ohio except metro areas, not only does Walmart sell guns, but so does Meijer. Just because they sell them, doesn't make that store a "bad" store. For every legal use of a gun, a bag of apples, a bottle of liquer, a porn magazine or you name it, there are just as many illegal uses for them. It's people like you that raise kids who don't have RESPECT for a firearm and treat it like a toy or that big bad thing in that store. Guns are not bad....people are. So lets concentrate on the people and show them how to respect firearms.

      --

      Gorkman

    21. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by shepd · · Score: 1

      Hey, I didn't say it was bad or good in that comment.

      That said, I will now say I do think handguns are bad. Rifles, there's a reason for them, but the only way to use (I don't just mean hold menacingly, but use) a handgun is to either shoot targets of people, or shoot real people.

      >It's people like you that raise kids who don't have RESPECT for a firearm and treat it like a toy or that big bad thing in that store.

      Agreed. Here's the cold, hard facts:

      USA has more deaths per capita from shootings than Canada.
      Canada has more deaths from improper use of a firearm than the USA.

      I can find you proof if you need it (it is a PITA to find, though). :-)

      Question: Which is better? Something you can prevent yourself by _not_ owning a gun, or learning to use one responsibly? Or is it living in a country where more people die by firearms overall than a country that restricts their ownership, but enjoying the freedom of ownership yourself?

      We all make our choices. I like my country's choice. I'm sure you like yours.

      >Guns are not bad....people are

      Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people.

      >So lets concentrate on the people and show them how to respect firearms.

      Agreed. But I would limit it to respecting how to use a hunting rifle, not an AK-47 or a Luger.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    22. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

      Um, you can hunt with a handgun. I have a friend who used a handgun to hunt deer. She liked it because she can pull off shots quickly when the deer sprinted from the first shot (if she missed, and that was not often). Regardless of what anyone thinks, handguns are not just used to kill people. Varmint hunters use them everyday (work wonderfully if you have a raccon that keeps getting in your trash).

      Not all people with guns kill people. That's what your little blurb said to me (looked like you said all people with guns kill people). Let me remind you of other things that kill people:

      Knives
      Doctors (Malpractice insurance costs alot)
      A 55 gallon drum of Gasoline and fertilizer(Kansas City.....)
      Cars
      Motorcycles
      Airplanes
      Cigarett es
      Cigars
      Smoking a Pipe
      Chewing Tobacco
      McDonalds
      Taco Bell
      KFC
      Pizza
      Sugar
      Electricity
      Falling off of a bicycle

      etc etc

      By your assumption, we should ban all things that can kill people regardless of if they have a lawful use. You know what? That's just stupid. I am going to go see Bowling for Columbine but because I want to see if he can find out why we have more murders per capita. Michael Moore even stated in a interview with Tim Russert that Canada has 7 million guns for 10 million households yet the murder rate remains low. In Switzerland who has no organized military, almost every person there has a assualt rifle yet the murder rate remains low. Why can we not do this here??? Personally, I think, and this may sound off base, we have a limited education on firearms. Teenagers like to play games that use firearms in them but really don't have any idea of the kind o freal damage that one is capable of. It's my belief that firearm education whould be mandatory. Have an lesson early say at about the age of ten where they go to a range and fire a rifle. Let them see the kind of damage that can occur. If not actually doing the firing, they could watch a firearms expert do a demo. Some folks my not lik eit, but I feel that once a healthy respect for guns is developed, then the desire to shoot someone or even the desire to think about it will go down.

      --

      Gorkman

    23. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by shepd · · Score: 1

      >Michael Moore even stated in a interview with Tim Russert that Canada has 7 million guns for 10 million households yet the murder rate remains low.

      Bingo. And Canada doesn't allow handguns (in general -- there may be some exceptions, but apart from police I don't know of any).

      I have no problems with guns per se, I only have a problem with guns that are for killing people (Semi/Automatic weapons should be banned worldwide -- PERIOD).

      Handguns might make good weapons for hunting (although all my hunting friend disagree) but they cause too many murders.

      >By your assumption, we should ban all things that can kill people regardless of if they have a lawful use.

      No, I just think that anything that shows a noticeable amount of abuse that results in death should be banned. Handguns are abused by most because they are so easily concealed.

      IMHO, that's why America's shooting rates are so high. People lose their temper and reach for the loaded handgun sitting in their glove compartment/purse. Take the temptation away, require rifles to be trigger locked, locked in a gun case, and unconcealed and it makes someone with a bad temper take a moment to reconsider.

      I suppose my problem is mostly with concealed weapons. It's hard to conceal a rifle, and rifles have a non-murderous purpose, so that's my argument as to why I don't like handguns being legal. Just too easy to conceal.

      Education is always good, but forced education for people who don't want to use handguns at an early age is a bad idea. Trust me, as a defiant person, it will work the reverse of what's expected if it's required for everyone. ;-)

      And no, I don't own a gun. But I feel totally safe. And so does mom. IMHO (again) anyone who has to carry a concealed weapon to feel safe is a coward.

      >That's what your little blurb said to me (looked like you said all people with guns kill people).

      Well, sorta. It's over the top because it's my favourite anti-NRA quote, and a Simpsons quote at the same time.

      Anyways, that list you gave me, stripping off the self-inflicted deaths (choking on gum, eating McDs to death, etc) all but knives take time so hotheads have a chance to re-think things. And, more often than not, I've usually found myself without a knife when I want to do a job, so I doubt I'd have one should someone get me really pissed off. But, then again, I'm (hopefully) emotionally stable enough not to do anything stupid. However, not everyone is.

      I hope that all makes sense.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    24. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

      No, it does not make any sense at all. You say you just want to ban guns that kill people. Got news for you.....a hunting rifle CAN KILL YOU. Don't believe me? Go stand out there while I shoot at ya pard! SHEESH!

      Also, I know of alot of folks who DO use handguns to hunt with. You must not know many hunters.

      Also, even the FOP is AGAINST gun control. The police have enough to do. A law abiding citizen can have a handgun for protection. If you step in my house and are robbing me at gun point and at some point I get your gun or my gun and shoot you and kill you....you know what? That's a LEGAL use of a hand gun and there's nothing they can do about it unless you don't have a license for it (you should not even have to do THAT to own a gun, but I supposed it's warranted).

      Never said gun training should be required for everyone, although that's not a bad idea. In some countrys it's virtually a requirement to own a gun. Why not here??? Because we are a land of the free and home of the brave.....because we are a somewhat free country, we have the right to say no I don't want to own a gun.

      Also concealed guns of most types be they handguns or rifles are by and large illegal, but of the states that have a conceal carry law, Texas in particular, violent crimes have, gasp....actually continued to decrease! But wait that's not supposed to happen in your perfect little world is it?? When all of us have our little concealed weapons in our hip pocket crime is supposed to go up by your assumption. Yes I am well aware of that the rate was already on a downward trend in Texas before conceal carry laws went into effect, but by what your saying, the rate should have gone up but the rate of decrease continued downward. Folks who are saying they are for gun safety (meaning let's just restrict assault rifles or let's restrict handguns those are the guns that kill people)have no idea what guns can do for you in a legal sense. I mean what kind of hippocritical mumbo jumbo has a spokesperson, Rosie O'donnell, that is against guns and can't do Kmart commercials because they sell hunting rifles and handguns but then has bodyguards packing????? HMM!

      --

      Gorkman

    25. Re:Not a big deal unless its legislated. by shepd · · Score: 1

      Okay, I think this is how we're viewing each end of our situations:

      You think handguns are A-OK because they have a legitimate use.

      I think handguns are bad because they are too easily concealed, and are too easily used in the heat of an argument.

      I would suggest you would conter by saying that paying for security in essential liberties is wrong.

      I would counter by saying that owning a handgun is not essential. One can get the job done very fine with a rifle.

      Then you might suggest that either criminals will have handguns / people need to be secure with handguns / people need to learn how to use them.

      I would counter by saying Canada has a lower death rate due to firearms.

      Then you'd likely suggest that in some other country (did you mention Sweeden last time? It isn't all that important) is safe even though they have the next best thing to a nuclear bazooka.

      I would country by saying western culture doesn't work like that.

      I doubt there is a resolution to this other than to say that if you like handguns, and think liberty is the most important thing in life, live in the US. If you want safety from handguns (like the stats say), live in Canada.

      I like living in a country without handguns. It's been so long since I've heard about a crime in my city involving a real handgun I've forgotten what year it was.

      But, then again, I don't hunt, and I have no interest to do so. However, as I have mentioned, I do know hunters who are perfectly happy using only a rifle.

      >Rosie O'donnell, that is against guns and can't do Kmart commercials because they sell hunting rifles and handguns but then has bodyguards packing?

      Not in Canada. Not unless they want to go to jail for a very long time.

      >...Texas in particular, violent crimes have, gasp....actually continued to decrease!

      Many things have changed in Texas apart from that, though. IIRC, you can no longer drink a beer and drive at the same time, for example.

      >In some countrys it's virtually a requirement to own a gun. Why not here?

      Because Canada is safe without guns. I DON'T WANT TO USE A GUN. I shouted that because I am serious about that. I WILL NEVER KILL ON PURPOSE. Guns are for killing, wether that is for meat or for people, they Kill. Some (many) of us HATE KILLING. No, I don't hate hunters, I simply detest the act. Yes, I still eat meat. Interesting the conundrums the mind can conjure and yet still ignore. :-)

      Fortunately, like I've said, it isn't hard to pick your side of the fence on this. If you want to live in a country where anyone can point a handgun at you at will, live in the US. If you don't, live in Canada.

      >If you step in my house and are robbing me at gun point and at some point I get your gun or my gun and shoot you and kill you....you know what? That's a LEGAL use of a hand gun and there's nothing they can do about it unless you don't have a license for it (you should not even have to do THAT to own a gun, but I supposed it's warranted).

      Arming the populace with vigilante justice rather than properly policing the people is a poor excuse for safety, and an even worse excuse for liberty. What I _really_ find interesting, though, is that the US itself has more people imprisoned as there are imprisoned in all of Europe! With a stat like that, perhaps in the US vigilante justice is all that's left.

      That's where the difference is -- In the US, liberty sometimes comes before life, whereas in Canada, that isn't so.

      I wonder if that has anything to do with the difference in shootings between Canada in the US. Perhaps people aren't shooting robbers all the time over their TV sets in Canada. I say I'd rather give someone my shit than have their blood on my hands. But again, that's another difference between the US and Canada: The entire criminal justice system. Canada's is based on reform & respect of criminals and their problems, whereas the US system is based on punishment and repentance. I see in the US someone would simply say to themselves "Another asshole robber dead. Good thing.", but in Canada one would say "When did that criminal go wrong? And why would anyone get worked up so much over their TV that they need to kill to keep it?"

      Anyways, just my 2 cents. Don't take life all that seriously. You might end up feeling the urge to buy a gun to protect yourself from it.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
  14. sigh by tx_mgm · · Score: 3, Funny


    good, my little 6 year old billy is way too young to see such vulgarity! the makers of this game should be thrown in jail for exposing our children to this filth!
    now, if you'll excuse me. i need to take billy to the movies, he wants to see the transporter.

    --
    Gentlemen...BEHOLD!
    -Dr. Weird
    1. Re:sigh by tx_mgm · · Score: 1

      ah! typo! before you mod that down, i meant to say it was sarcastic....im not a troll! really!

      --
      Gentlemen...BEHOLD!
      -Dr. Weird
  15. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by Ashcrow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From reading the blurb from the acclaim site I would say it is not near X rated. While I do think it is compleatly distastefull, I think you can find more sexual content in "Not Another Teen Movie" or "Too High".

  16. This just means... by Cytlid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... I won't *buy* it at Wal-mart, Best Buy...

    --
    FLR
  17. this is not the first time by asv108 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I beleive there were also similar efforts back in the day invlovling Leisure Suit Larry, but I doubt any of those retailers sold PC games during the 80's and early 90's when Leisure Suit Larry was at its peak. This probably the best publicity going, especially if the game isn't that good, which I can't imagine how BMX and XXX would go together well.

  18. Sales ploy??? by umStefa · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This smells to me like a marketing ploy. Remember Showgirls?, one of the worst movies ever but by stirring up controversy the movie generated sufficent sales to be profitable.

    Since profitablity is the bottem line for Acclaim here, by getting the media to report on major chains refusing to carry the game they will probally generate more sales and hence greater profits.

    --
    Technology is most abused by the very people it was created to help
  19. American Double Standard, yet again. by jessemckinney · · Score: 1

    I would imagine that they would have us think that there is notheing wrong with violence, and everything wrong with sex. Talk about a messed up set of priorities. This is the same thing that happens in every blockbuster. All violence and no sex. This sends a clear message to people.

  20. well... by jgerman · · Score: 3, Informative
    I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart sells rated-R movies (including those arguably targeted at the same age group as this game is


    Walmart does however, sell censored versions of a lot of media. Which is why I refuse to buy anything there. I'd hate to bring a cd or dvd home that's been Walmartized.

    --
    I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    1. Re:well... by hkmp5sd5 · · Score: 1

      note the above post, it takes away your comparisions with movies and songs that you were probably gonna write about

  21. Thank You from Acclaim! by Perdo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dear Walmart,

    Thank you for insuring that our new game "BMX XXX" becomes the most sought after title to ever hit the market. You see, in our business there is no such thing as bad publicity, which you have provided us in spades. We are now the "Sopranos" of the gaming world. There is nothing like controversy to insure we have an audience.

    Again, Thank You.

    P.S. We're sorry you are going to miss the sales revenue generated by this sleeper cult classic... On second thought, we could care less about your puritanical revenue model destroyed by a week's loss in imports.

    --

    If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.

    1. Re:Thank You from Acclaim! by drinkypoo · · Score: 2
      By "sleeper" you must mean "when it reaches $19.99", which is about when wal-mart and its ilk ends up getting most PC games in anyway.

      By that time you'll be able to buy disney movies in which simba fucks his daughter on the plain because it's the way he will pass on his dying seed. The baboon will clap with one hand (he's a shaman, remember?) while stroking his cane with the other. And let's not even talk about the hyenas.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  22. Guaranteed to sell now... by WarpedMind · · Score: 1

    This kind of censorship will ensure this thing will be one of the hottest things selling. They may not carry it in the stores, but watch their online sites. Also watch for this thing to be traded like crazy on EBay.

    Of course I'm speaking from the truely informed position of someone who doesn't even own a console of any kind. (My kid is still to young to badger me for one.)

    1. Re:Guaranteed to sell now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Puritan" should not be a term of derision. Those who use it as such are usually showing their ignorance of the Puritan movement. The Puritans celebrated love & lovemaking when practiced within the bounds of marriage, as the scriptures teach.

      The "Salem Witch Trials" are not characteristic of the Puritan movement.

      I urge those who mention them to take a look at what they stood for (as seen in their own words, not those of those self-proclaimed historians with a chip on their shoulders). I think you'll find that they were generally decent and lively people with keen minds and soft, humble hearts.

  23. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by The_dev0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The title may be XXX, but I doubt very much the content will actually be X-rated. After all, it is a game with nude girls riding bikes, not engaging in penetrative sex. From all the reviews i've read, it is just a rehash of the last game but with scantily-clad ladies on the bikes instead of blokes in baggy trousers.

    --
    Never fight naked, unless you're in prison...
  24. Wal-mart. by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

    Wal-mart was the retailer than pulled teh Goo-Goo Dolls album "A Boy Named Goo" because the boy on the cover had 'goo' that looked like blood and Wal-mart doesn't like to sponsor child abuse.

    Idiots.

    1. Re:Wal-mart. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incidentally, any pulled Goo Goo Dolls merchandise is a good thing. But the censorship thing still sucks.

      They also removed Tool's Undertow CD because it had an X-ray photo of a dude with a flashlight or something lodged in his rectum(on the inner-sleeve).

    2. Re:Wal-mart. by lateralus_1024 · · Score: 1

      Wal-Mart is very much against Child Abuse. But if that child abuse is in say.... a sweat shop in Malaysia, then it's all good.
      Line up the youngin's...we need to weave some floor mat's!!

      --
      If you think /. comments are bad, check out Digg.
  25. Acclaim... by Schnapple · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ...is the greasy turd on the game industry. What with buying ad space on tombstones, to paying people to change their names to "Turok", to paying speeding tickets for people on their way to buy their racing game, they're scum (though all these promotions did originate in the U.K.). Plus, Acclaim is the "quick and dirty" game house - when you want your property made into a game qucikly and don't give a crap about the game being good (any South Park game, any of the Batman movie games), Acclaim will proudly take your money and make you some piece of crap in a record amount of time.

    Acclaim is to the game industry what Troma is to the movie industry.

    On a related note, does anyone know if this game will use the extremely rare "AO" (Adults Only) ESRB rating?

    1. Re:Acclaim... by pythas · · Score: 1

      It's rated M.

      Come to think of it, I've never seen an AO rated game at all, anywhere.

      Have any even been made, or is it just commercial suicide?

    2. Re:Acclaim... by Tar-Palantir · · Score: 3, Informative

      Read the article -- it indicates the game will carry a "Mature" rating, which I believe means 17 and up only.

    3. Re:Acclaim... by macrom · · Score: 5, Informative

      http://www.esrb.org/power_search.asp?type=game

      Select "Adults Only" and then search. You should get 15 titles, none of which sound familiar. Maybe Hastings (as mentioned above) has them on the top shelf with the Penthouse entertainment.

    4. Re:Acclaim... by TheOnlyCoolTim · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There are "games" that are basically hardcore pornos that carry the AO rating...

      Tim

      --
      Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
    5. Re:Acclaim... by Schnapple · · Score: 3, Interesting

      yeah, most of the games that would be considered "AO" don't bother to even get a rating. Memory serves that Phantasmagoria 2: A Puzzle of Flesh, the first PC game from a major publisher (Sierra) with frontal nudity was destined to get an "AO" rating, so Sierra used the RASC (with 0-4 ratings for sex, violence and language) to rate the game instead. The game still didn't sell or make it into too many retailers. Curiously, in subsequent re-releases (boxed with Phantasmagoria) it's rated "M".

    6. Re:Acclaim... by jkf · · Score: 1

      On a related note, does anyone know if this game will use the extremely rare "AO" (Adults Only) ESRB rating?

      According to an interview done with Acclaim in OXM, they are trying to push the M rating as far as they can.

    7. Re:Acclaim... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      But, TROMA makes a stand against the MPAA, they aren't an MPAA member, and the owners of TROMA basically hate the MPAA (and their stupid "you have to pay us to rate your movie so you can sell it to certain stores who don't buy unrated movies, oh, and we rate based on if we like the movie too, bu tthat's not official" rating system). and have you ever watched Cannibal: The Musical or... Viewer Discretion Advised? Those movies rock, man.

      Acclaim is a member of the IDSA, they love the IDSA. They do not say bad things about the IDSA.

    8. Re:Acclaim... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I bought Phantasmagoria 2 from Wal-Mart when it first came out, and it was rated 'M'. I still have the game with box here. Who knows, maybe Wal-Mart didn't know that it had some hooters in it.

    9. Re:Acclaim... by dacarr · · Score: 2
      Acclaim is to the game industry what Troma is to the movie industry.

      Yes, but at least with Troma, the crap is so bad it's good.

      --
      This sig no verb.
    10. Re:Acclaim... by Belgand · · Score: 1

      Hey now! Troma is nowhere near as bad as a some of the crap Acclaim puts out. Not to mention being very aware of making silly, cheesy B-movies. It's not about the money so much as it is about the fact that people want it.

    11. Re:Acclaim... by Babbster · · Score: 2
      As a response to you and the rest who keep bagging on what a horrid game this is, and how Acclaim only releases crap, I have the following:

      Shut the hell up.

      Now that THAT is out of my system, I will note that Dave Mirra's BMX (and its sequels) have been very popular and pretty well-liked games. I offer this so that interested people can pop on over and get an idea of how gaming sites reviewed the last Acclaim BMX title (Dave Mirra 2), of which this is the followup, in fact if not in name (It was originally going to have Dave's name on it but he pulled out, probably at the advice of his agent/PR people).

      In terms of other games that Acclaim has put out that have garnered, well, "acclaim," we have Turok (at least the original), Aggressive Inline (on my to-buy list), NBA Jam (a Genesis classic), Quarterback Club (not my cup of tea but I had a lot of friends back in the day who liked it) and many other games over the years.

      In short, people who bag on games before they've played them are idiots. For myself, I'm not sure if I'm going to pick up BMX XXX simply because I have little interest in the sport and don't pick up every extreme sports title (I loved SSX Tricky and Aggressive Inline has just about won me over with the testimonials and great press). You can be assured, however, that if I do get it (depending on the gameplay and reviews of such) I will pick up the uncensored version so that I can presumably enjoy a solid extreme sports game that alost happens to include hot naked chicks...it's hard to understand any [male] gamer having any trouble with the concept.

      I will also offer my hearty congratulations to Acclaim for all the buzz they've been generating lately. Between the gravestone silliness, the "name your kid Turok for big prizes" crap and now the nekkid bike-riding, they are definitely kicking ass in marketing.

    12. Re:Acclaim... by spiro_killglance · · Score: 2

      I loved the paying speeding tickets stunt. I've
      been while pissed of this the goverment putting
      speed cameras and low speed limits on good solid
      dual carriageways.

      Oh and a like Troma movies (occasionly) too.

    13. Re:Acclaim... by Xenopax · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Oh god, why did you remind me of that horrible, horrible game. I actually bought that piece of crap.

    14. Re:Acclaim... by Schnapple · · Score: 3, Interesting
      As a response to you and the rest who keep bagging on what a horrid game this is, and how Acclaim only releases crap, I have the following:

      Shut the hell up.

      You're right in the respect that one shouldn't diss a game they haven't played. Look at the number of people who dissed Daikatana without playing it (for the record, it wasn't that bad). I for one might even rent or play this game, but being married I catch enough flack that all games are "evil fucked up bloody shit", I don't need the words "with nudity!" tacked on to the end of it.

      To me (and I know this will open up a big can of worms), this game is like PC Accelerator, which was a decent magazine on its own merit, but it's like they woke up one morning and said "Titties sell! Let's put them on every cover!". Don't get me wrong, I love boobies, but to me, taking something that has nothing to do with gaming and placing it on the cover to appeal to the lowest common denominator is stupid. Acclaim woke up one morning and said "man, it would sell so much more if we put titties in it....and swears! Lots of swear words!" I'm glad most retailers won't sell it - if it sold well it would just encourage this sort of thing (witness the Deer Hunter phonomena we're just starting to see the end of).

      And you're right, Acclaim doesn't only release crap. Turok 2 comes to mind as one of the better games I've ever played. But Acclaim is guilty of running it into the ground (look at how bad every Turok game since has been).

      they are definitely kicking ass in marketing
      This is only true if you subscribe to the notion that there's no such thing as bad publicity and being unpopular is more important than being indifferent.
    15. Re:Acclaim... by Babbster · · Score: 2
      I guess I just don't understand where all the prudes are coming from. If BMX XXX is entertaining (funny, fun to play and offering good-looking women), then what's the problem? Have we forgotten that games ARE entertainment and that most guys find looking at good-looking women (unclothed women in particular) entertaining?

      Now, because so many people in this country are unreasonably uptight I understand the need to keep the game out of the hands of children, but all this hand-wringing about the game in general makes me wonder if everyone here is covering their walls with posters of Phil Donahue and Alan Alda.

  26. GTA 3 comparisons? by sielwolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the article's comparisons to GTA 3 are unfounded. Why? Because GTA 3 had some very innovative gameplay: a continuous and hugely interactive world with missions taking place directly in the environment, a wide variety of exploration options leading to a huge replay value.

    BMX XXX is a.... bmx game. Now I'm not going to say that GTA 3 is a Goodfellas or even a Sopranos but it at least had a semi-adult theme: criminal underworld. It was about as accurate as... I dunno, a CBS Sunday Night movie on the mob. And so there was little stretching the imagination to see that prostitution and drugs and violence would be involved.

    But a BMX game? It's like trying to get people to switch to Linux by lacing nekkid girlie pictures into the kernel. A shallow attempt to spice something up.

    --
    What is music when you despise all sound?
    1. Re:GTA 3 comparisons? by josh+crawley · · Score: 1

      --It's like trying to get people to switch to Linux by lacing nekkid girlie pictures into the kernel. A shallow attempt to spice something up.

      Is there something wrong when I press autopr0n pics onto debian 3.0r1 discs? It sure tempts Windows users.

      Gheh heh heh

    2. Re:GTA 3 comparisons? by taernim · · Score: 1

      Hm... seductive pictures of Tux would be amusing though. :P

      --
      "PC Load Letter? What the $@#% does that mean?!"
    3. Re:GTA 3 comparisons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only to you, you fucking Linux pervbag.

    4. Re:GTA 3 comparisons? by goon+america · · Score: 1
      It's like trying to get people to switch to Linux by lacing nekkid girlie pictures into the kernel.

      Let's not be too hasty. We've got market share to think of.

    5. Re:GTA 3 comparisons? by isorox · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's like trying to get people to switch to Linux by lacing nekkid girlie pictures into the kernel. A shallow attempt to spice something up.

      Link?

    6. Re:GTA 3 comparisons? by Rhinobird · · Score: 2

      It's like trying to get people to switch to Linux by lacing nekkid girlie pictures into the kernel

      3 weeks from now that's going to in the kernal. Thank you very much!

      --
      If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
    7. Re:GTA 3 comparisons? by pjrc · · Score: 2
      It's like trying to get people to switch to Linux by lacing nekkid girlie pictures into the kernel

      Hmm.. I wonder how this part of section 3 in the GPL would apply :)

      The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it.
  27. Ok to play at killing but not at making love. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Very American: ok for kids to see bullets but not dicks. Violence is acceptable but sex is just dirty.

  28. Good by SexyKellyOsbourne · · Score: 1

    Now that we have advanced systems and greedy corporations profiting off of putting smut on every CD until most of the games on the market are rated R (MA-17 or whatever), it's going to have some definite effects on society.

    We already have enough people who are desensitized to this killing -- I felt terrible when I blew someone's head into a bunch of tiny pink chunks in Counter-Strike, I was appalled. Now I can watch Faces of Death without flinching, and I frequently think of blowing people apart in real-life with an AR-15 like in Counter-Strike, and it scares me.

    Now games go further than violence, like with Grand Theft Auto 3 -- and with every kid in our nation being latchkey kids, we're going to raise an entire generation of sociopaths that are going to make the droogs in A Clockwork Orange look like a choir boys.

    Corporations are getting rich off of peddling smut, and it's about time family businesses took a stand against the immoral and depraved game industry.

    1. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Die goatsex link posting motherfucker! Moderators, force this asshole to come up with a new identity to troll under.

    2. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm...there's something wrong with your username.

    3. Re:Good by JosefWells · · Score: 1

      >and I frequently think of blowing people apart >in real-life with an AR-15 like in Counter->Strike, and it scares me.

      If this is the case, you sir, need help.

      Talk to someone about these feelings, consider going to a therapist. Not like you are a bad person, and it is good that you can recognize such thoughts. Don't let it fester in your mind..

      and don't spoil it for the rest of us.. I love my sex & violence, and I am a peace loving hippy who can't even drop a lobster into a pot of water.

    4. Re:Good by Murdock037 · · Score: 2

      I felt terrible when I blew someone's head into a bunch of tiny pink chunks in Counter-Strike.

      You did realize that the head, and those pink chunks, were pixels, right? Because that's the kind of distinction that most people can make by the time they're, you know, five.

      People are not as stupid as the knee-jerk reactionaries would like to think. If a kid doesn't know how to handle the images he sees in the world, then it's the fault of the parents for not preparing him to see them, and then allowing him to be exposed to such things anyways.

      To make one of those mistakes is a shame; to make two, irresponsible.

      Walmart isn't responsible for what you let your kids see. They are not raising your kid. It's galling of you to assume that.

      ...we're going to raise an entire generation of sociopaths that are going to make the droogs in A Clockwork Orange look like a choir boys.

      The message I got out of Clockwork Orange was that a rabidly controlling society is just as bad, if not worse, than an out-of-control one, and it leaves the youth unprepared to handle the world. Watch more than the first twenty minutes next time.

  29. Wal Mart by Evro · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart sells rated-R movies (including those arguably targeted at the same age group as this game is), so make your own judgement...

    When you buy an R-rated movie at Wal-Mart, at checkout, a thing pops up to remind the cashier to ask you for ID. So yes, Walmart does sell those movies, but no, they don't sell them to under-17 people. And I challenge you to find movies with full frontal nudity on Walmart's shelves.

    --
    rooooar
    1. Re:Wal Mart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I haven't been to the store yet, but the walmart web site has Eyes Wide Shut. Personally, I think this was one of the raunchiest movies I've seen in a while. There ya go

    2. Re:Wal Mart by welshsocialist · · Score: 1

      I've seen R rated movies at Wal Mart. I never buy due to the fact that I don't want to use my dollars to support a group that censors things it doesn't care for.

      --
      Support the Chagossians
    3. Re:Wal Mart by Evro · · Score: 1

      "When you buy an R-rated movie at Wal-Mart, at checkout, a thing pops up to remind the cashier to ask you for ID. So yes, Walmart does sell those movies, but no, they don't sell them to under-17 people. And I challenge you to find movies with full frontal nudity on Walmart's shelves."

      Also, if you don't support Wal Mart, then why do you go there? And how is it censorship that they refuse to sell things (in their own stores) that they don't like? Would you like the government to force them to sell these things? It's not Wal Mart's fault that the RIAA caves to their wishes. Of all the boycotts I have ever seen, this is truly the stupidest.

      --
      rooooar
    4. Re:Wal Mart by welshsocialist · · Score: 1
      Also, if you don't support Wal Mart, then why do you go there?

      There are other things @ Wal Mart besides CDs or movies. I go there for those other things. If I want CDs (I don't buy them anymore) or movies, I go to a specialty store.

      --
      Support the Chagossians
    5. Re:Wal Mart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wild Things DVD on the $9 rack.

  30. comment by sstory · · Score: 4, Funny
    I can't see that this is a big deal. I'm a member of the ACLU, and don't see anything wrong with Acclaim making the game, or people buying it, but is it a big deal that a store doesn't want to sell a bmx game with naked chicks in it? No. I can't even remember the last time I was in a Wal-Mart.

    On another note, this game might be just what it takes to get me into gaming. Final Fantasy didn't do it, but if Aki had been naked....

    1. Re:comment by 2short · · Score: 1

      You managed it even before your post began:
      "by Anonymous Coward"

    2. Re:comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call Bullshit. You never even tried a Final Fantasy game. None of the game has a character named Aki. The movie did, but the movie is not based on and has nothing to do with any of the games.

  31. cmon, where's the luv, baby... by _PimpDaddy7_ · · Score: 2, Funny

    Cmon, they made me look REAL great in the pimp outfit, you guys gotta check out this game!

    Little Johnny on the Redline, performs endos and bunny hops for my ladies....

  32. Eminem by ekrout · · Score: 3, Insightful

    OK, so Wal-mart, K-mart, and Quicky-marts can sell Eminem albums (and lots of 'em), but they won't dare sell videogames with 16-bit color depth-versions of naked women?

    So the following sample of Eminem lyrics -- "Ya'll niggas wanna dead..Then wanna ride..Ya'll know the niggas that be steady screamin'.. (Fuck you!).. It's murda murda.. you know it's murda murda.. We scream it.. we yell it.. we livin' murda murda murda" -- is perfectly wholesome, family-oriented poetry, but the aforementioned dorky BMX racing game is just too crude to sell?

    --

    If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
    1. Re:Eminem by Istealmymusic · · Score: 1

      Clearly its a conspiracy we cannot perceive. Initiated death is accepted, initiated procreation is not. Humankind has swayed towards violence as its population has grown out of control, out of bounds, out of reach of the world's food supply--and it has turned back on itself, condemning creation, encouraging the opposite. It's a perfectly natural biological phenonmena--ever put a dozen pigons in an oversmall pen? They don't fuck, they kill.

      --
      "The lesson to be learned is not to take the comments on slashdot too literally." --Vinnie Falco, BearShare
    2. Re:Eminem by jumpingfred · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think that Wal-Mart sells Eminem's music. Certainly Wal-mart.com did not have any. Wal-Mart gets a lot of flack for requesting clean versions of discs for sale at wal-mart.

    3. Re:Eminem by alienw · · Score: 1

      Eminem albums at wally's world are censored/bleeped, btw. Also, if I owned a store, I would _not_ sell a game called "BMX XXX". The name is inappropriate by itself, and implies that it's porn (even though it's not). Besides, it's probably crap, so who cares?

    4. Re:Eminem by nekura · · Score: 1

      I don't ever remember Eminem shouting the "n" word on ANY of his songs. I believe those lyrics belong to Ja Rule. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, Wal-mart sells censored versions of albums... what a terrible misfortune when I unknowingly bought an album there, only to hear words bleep'd out.

      --

      "Programming is like sex - one mistake and you'll have to support it for the rest of your life."
    5. Re:Eminem by Powercntrl · · Score: 5, Informative

      So the following sample of Eminem lyrics

      That's actually Ja Rule. Eminem has made a point of the fact that he won't say "nigga" because he is white and for a white man to refer to a black man as a "nigga" is considered derogatory. If you actually listen to Eminem's message, it's basically self-parody. He's got a point that if this country was truly so shocked by what he had to say, NO ONE WOULD BUY HIS ALBUMS.

      A better analogy would be that Wal-Mart sells shotguns. Killing animals with firearms = good, playing a video game with virtual tits and ass = bad. That's just typical good ol' boy thinking anyway - it's to be expected from Wal-Mart.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    6. Re:Eminem by damiam · · Score: 1
      First of all, I believe Wal-Mart only sells edited versions of Parental Advisory albums.

      Second of all, those lyrics aren't Eminem - they're from a Ja Rule song called "Fuck You". If you'd ever listened to Eminem, you'd know that that's not the kind of thing he would say.

      Third of all, I completely agree that the *marts are being completely illogical and hypocritical.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    7. Re:Eminem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you'd ever listened to Eminem, you'd know that that's not the kind of thing he would say.

      Oops, my bad...

    8. Re:Eminem by k_187 · · Score: 2

      Yes, but Wal-Mart normally sells clean versions of CDs, making your're lovely Eminem quote sound more like this:

      "Ya'll wanna ..Then wanna ride..Ya'll know the that be steady screamin'.. ().. It's .. you know it's .. We scream it.. we yell it.. we livin' "

      --
      11 was a racehorse
      12 was 12
      1111 Race
      12112
    9. Re:Eminem by Nameles · · Score: 1

      Err.. I thought it was Eminem Ft/Tupac - Murda Murda, according to my ID3 tag.

    10. Re:Eminem by buck_wild · · Score: 1

      What abou the new Vin Diesel movie 'XXX'? Would you sell that?

      --
      If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
    11. Re:Eminem by jkf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OK, so Wal-mart, K-mart, and Quicky-marts can sell Eminem albums (and lots of 'em), but they won't dare sell videogames with 16-bit color depth-versions of naked women?

      From what I've read in OXM, its supposed to be DVD quality video, that they shot themselves.

    12. Re:Eminem by buck_wild · · Score: 1

      If saying it is derogatory, why do I hear black people saying it all the time?

      --
      If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
    13. Re:Eminem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, there was that gratuitous hooker scene in the nightclub... "Bitches come!"

    14. Re:Eminem by buck_wild · · Score: 1

      Unlike any other movies WalMart sells, right?

      --
      If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
    15. Re:Eminem by Kintanon · · Score: 2

      Cultural Context.

      Kintanon
      The following statement was placed here to overcome the 20 second posting limit.
      The previous satement was placed here to overcome the 20 second posting list.

      --
      Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
    16. Re:Eminem by WWE-TicK · · Score: 1

      > If saying it is derogatory, why do I hear black
      > people saying it all the time?

      What part of "for a white man to refer to a black man " did you not understand?

    17. Re:Eminem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't seen a gratuitous hooker scene in a long while, actually. Most movies involving prostitutes are either porn or "documentaries" about drugs, whereas in this it was thrown in. Wal-Mart probably doesn't sell either of the other two types.

    18. Re:Eminem by ma++i+ude · · Score: 1
      Also, if I owned a store, I would _not_ sell a game called "BMX XXX". The name is inappropriate by itself, and implies that it's porn (even though it's not).

      Absolutely. This is why they are going to rename it BMX PG.

      --
      You can't shut us down! The Internet is about the free exchange and sale of other people's ideas!
    19. Re:Eminem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Walmart does not sell Eminem, in any fashion. I work in the electronics dept at one. We also have the individual store right to pull anything off of the shelf we feel fit. Often its nudity on CD albums, and violent pictures (cd covers, movie covers). At the register, movies and games that are rated NC17 are checked, we ask for ID in these situations, stopping Billy from getting GTA3 himself. A few of the associates have made it a point to inform the parents of the games (myself incliuded). On that note, there are many (most) parents that will buy their children the game because "He's already played it, we rented it last weekend". Welcome to the 21st century, 8 out of the 10 parents attempting to buy the game for their 11 year old knows what the game is, and doesn't care.

    20. Re:Eminem by damiam · · Score: 1
      ID3 tags on p2p music have a tendancy to be wrong. A google search turns up those lyrics in about a thousand Ja Rule pages and no Eminem pages that I can see. If it actually is an Eminem ft/Tupac song, it's still not on any of Eminem's albums.

      Now, I'm not saying Eminem's songs are squeeky-clean, but they (at least the recent ones) don't have quite that level of violence.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    21. Re:Eminem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not an Eminem song, that's Ja Rule and Vita (god damned, I shouldn't know that). And the wal-mart version would sound like this: Ya'll ... wanna dead (who?)
      Then wanna ride (who?)
      Y'all know ... that be steady screamin' (... you!)
      It's birdie, birdie, you know it's birdie birdie
      We scream it, we yell it, we livin' birdie birdie birdie

    22. Re:Eminem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same reason it's alright for you to call your lover a fag, but it's derogatory if I call you a fucking faggot.

  33. Outrageous by drhairston · · Score: 2, Troll

    I'm not sure I agree with the story's claim that Wal-Mart sells R-rated movies to the 12-and-under audience this game was created for. That would be illegal. Some fact checking appears to be in order.

    --
    Dr. Joseph Hairston
    Superintendent, CCBC
    1. Re:Outrageous by nekura · · Score: 1

      And why is this game aimed at the 12-and-under audience?

      --

      "Programming is like sex - one mistake and you'll have to support it for the rest of your life."
    2. Re:Outrageous by mrseigen · · Score: 1

      Because hopefully kids over 12 won't buy into the "controversy" surrounding this "explicit" and "horrific" game.

    3. Re:Outrageous by oasisbob · · Score: 1

      Since when is it illegal to sell R rated movies to minors? Last time I checked, the R rating, just like any other movie rating, is an optional tradmark that *can* be applied, but is not required.

      When was the last time you heard about anyone being fined for selling an R rated movie to a minor? Admiting a minor to an R rated movie?

      It's optional. Stores create their own policies to placate their customers.

      However, I may be wrong, and I'd welcome anyone to quote actual law.

  34. this aint a first by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

    I can remember quite a few different pr0n-themed Quake maps and mods, and that was back when Quake/QuakeWorld was it. Of course, those weren't in a toystore on the shelf with "XXX" in the name.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  35. Doesn't affect me.. by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... until Kazaa users turn ethical.

    1. Re:Doesn't affect me.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you mean stealing money from charities isn't ethical enough for you???

    2. Re:Doesn't affect me.. by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2

      "you mean stealing money from charities isn't ethical enough for you???"

      Are the users doing that or is the company who made Kazaa doing that? Heh.

  36. X rated!?! by penguin_punk · · Score: 4, Funny

    now THAT's more like it. I haven't seen this good of a game since Leisure Suit Larry!

    screenshot

    oh baby! - Jenni-cam move aside.

    --
    HURD - Hurd's Under Research & Development
    1. Re:X rated!?! by wass · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Cool screenshot. Shouldn't be too hard to release a version with the topless girls replaced by ones wearing a scant bikini, or something similar.

      So all this hubbub is about computer-generated rendered boobs? That's hysterical. Brings new meaning to the concept of 'fake boobs' too.

      --

      make world, not war

    2. Re:X rated!?! by ajd1474 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think you will find that they have already released a version without the nudity, swearing, dogs pissing and pimps. It's called, Dave Mirra BMX 2.

      So people who are offended by this game...DON'T BUY IT! :)

      The reality is that the current generation of consoles is aimed at the kids who grew up playing SNES and the like. They are now 25+ and arent going to have their young minds warped by a bit of swearing and nudity.

      Games have ratings for a reason. I still can't believe that games that portray realistic violence never cause a fuss, and yet a game which contains a bit of T&A and some swearing wont be stocked by some stores. Talk about a warped sense of reality...sheesh!

      --
      I refuse to have a sig... dammit!
    3. Re:X rated!?! by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      "Those are *evil* polygons you're looking at, Junior!"

  37. I know that walmart sold by Rooked_One · · Score: 1

    Leisure Suit Larry.... This is just a PR move made by some 50 or 60 year old people who just don't have thier screws right.

    1. Re:I know that walmart sold by mmol_6453 · · Score: 2

      At the time, those same 35-45-year-old people didn't know much about computers, and probably didn't know there could be graphical games on them.

      --
      What's this Submit thingy do?
  38. Free market. by ekephart · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart sells rated-R movies (including those arguably targeted at the same age group as this game is), so make your own judgement..."

    This is likely because video games present an interactive environment. While movies may desensitize us to violence and sex, video games give us the feel that we are part of the action. When presented this simply (which is how the general public is likely to perceive it) video games with similar adult or violent content are worse than movies of the same genre.

    That said, this move by these retailers isn't something to poo-poo too much. Retailers are free in this society to choose what they carry. No one goes into a WalMart and demands they sell hardcore pr0n. As a corollary these businesses have their respective markets to think about. For instance, one may prefer to buy a book at B&N over some Christian book stores, even though they may carry the same book (I don't know what book but just as an example), because of the "JESUS! JESUS! JESUS!" mentality that store may push on its customers. While they aren't the same, IMHO proselytizing in a bookstore isn't all that different than big SALE signs and such over merchandise. Let's not also forget we do have a free market and where there is a demand for the game there will be someone willing to sell and produce it. I predict much of the sales of this game will be online.

    --
    sig
    1. Re:Free market. by Effugas · · Score: 2

      video games give us the feel that we are part of the action

      Who's us?

      See, here's how it works:

      "I watch movies. Don't touch my movies. I don't play video games. Fuck video games."

      It's just that simple. "I drive. I don't smoke. I skydive. I don't gamble. I drink, but not so much that I get drunk. I tend to hang out in groups of three to seven people. I enjoy sports. Whatever I do must be legal. Ban whatever I'd never do, fine by me."

      Yours Truly,

      Dan Kaminsky
      DoxPara Research
      http://www.doxpara.com

  39. ut2003 is sold at walmart... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'We're not going to carry any software with any vulgarity or nudity -- we're just not going to do it'

    do they sell UT2003? I got that to say 'Holy shit', that's probably vulgar compared to their standards...

    let's not forget the Sims has tons of nude people(blurred out but easily 'fixed')

  40. I knew it!! You all want to see it! by mhoover · · Score: 1

    You assholes are slowing down my chance at seeing some naked CGI hoes!

    Stop it before I bitch smack you!

    BTW - I think I will at least rent it, yeah, I'm sick like that.

    --
    The dingo ate my sig.
  41. Walmart, thinking of the children by Pauly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "A Wal-Mart spokesman stated "We're not going to carry any software with any vulgarity or nudity -- we're just not going to do it."

    Pretty sanctimonious words for the largest retailer of firearms in the US.

    1. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Trusty+Penfold · · Score: 1

      The constitution requires you to own guns. The constitution does not require you to own video games.

    2. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Anonymous+Cowtard · · Score: 1

      Yep... how dare they do something guaranteed by the 2nd ammendment. (BTW, you can't say they are infringing on 1st amendment rights since they aren't the government.)

    3. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by GMontag451 · · Score: 2

      The constitution *requires* me to own guns?!?! Just when I thought gun nuts couldn't go any further.

    4. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by GMontag451 · · Score: 2

      Please show me where in the 2nd amendment the right to *sell* guns is guaranteed.

    5. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Stonehand · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Put down the crack pipe.

      The Constitution does not /require/ that anybody own a gun; it merely prohibits the government from banning them or otherwise contriving to render them useless (banning the ownership ammunition, for instance, would likely contradict it, as arguably infringing).

      Nor is any business /required/ to sell firearms -- at least, not by the Constitution.

      Now, at one point a specific Militia Act did require for heads of households to provide themselves with a firearm and ammunition, but that was... approximately 209 years ago, I think. And local ordinances (search for a town named "Front Sight") may strongly encourage the personal possession of firearms... but in most localities, it is no longer required.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    6. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 2

      Oh, come on, moderators.

      A troll is someone who says something only because they want to create a reaction. If someone says something that is guaranteed to create a reaction, that doesn't necessarily mean they're a troll. They might honestly feel that way. I hope you all get it in metamod.

      Pauly isn't trolling. I find it pretty hard to imagine that they even made trolls back in the sub-400 user days at slashdot.

      You might *disagree* with him. That's a great reason to *reply*, not mod down.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    7. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

      Pretty much says it all. When guns are finally outlawed by the left wingers, do you think the criminals will turn theirs in?

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    8. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by GoatPigSheep · · Score: 2, Informative

      well we all know that in america, violence is fine, but sex is not. Personally I prefer how it is in europe, where it's the other way around.

      --
      GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
    9. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Pauly · · Score: 2

      Now THAT'S a troll.

      Here, have my unwanted troll points, you earned 'em.

    10. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, and just when I was hoping for a .357 free with the purchase of any Happy Meal...

    11. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by shepd · · Score: 1

      Actually, the constitution only allows militias to own guns. It doesn't allow individuals who aren't part of a militia to own a gun (by which the mere use of the word requires a group of more than one, or it is a vigilante).

      God only knows why the NRA keeps force feeding such inane lies.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    12. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by shepd · · Score: 1

      >"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

      I don't know where you pulled that.

      The constitution actually says:

      "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

      It doesn't say what you said at all -- I'm assuming you are trying to quote the constitution. I might be wrong. Perhaps you are quoting the NRA instead?

      >Pretty much says it all. When guns are finally outlawed by the left wingers, do you think the criminals will turn theirs in?

      Guns are outlawed unless you are part of a well regulated Militia. Notice Militia is in capitals, and that it must be well regulated. An individual is not a militia.

      Oh, and I don't care if criminals turn theirs in. I don't care about the entire gun argument at all in the US. I just stand in awe that people can misquote their OWN most basic founding laws.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    13. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by GMontag451 · · Score: 2

      Even if you interpret the 2nd amendment as saying everyone has a right to keep and bear arms instead of just the militia (nice job at conveniently leaving that part out), I ask again where does it say you can *sell* guns? All I see is the right to have and use them.

    14. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by ynohoo · · Score: 1

      When guns are finally outlawed by the left wingers, do you think the criminals will turn theirs in?

      No, but it'll sure make it a hell of alot easier to tell the good guys from the bad guys...

    15. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by scheming+daemons · · Score: 1
      You gun-nuts always forget that the first words of the 2nd amendment are:

      "a well-regulated militia .... "

      You absolutely have the right to own a gun. The government also absolutely has the right to regulate that ownership.

      --
      "I have as much authority as the pope, I just
      don't have as many people who believe it" - George Carlin

    16. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Loki_1929 · · Score: 2

      The Constitution doesn't even do that. It merely provides citizens with the right to form a militia. Considering the fact that many of the founders were very much against having a standing army at all, it's not surprising to see an amendment which forces the federal government to accept the legality of citizen-run militias. The resident President has decided that the Constitution gives anyone and everyone the right to own, carry, use, play with, toy with, or do what-have-you with a gun. That's not what was intended; you have to look at the context.

      What it all comes down to is this: the founders wanted to ensure that the citizens of the United States of America had the ability to organize a defense against any foreign aggressor or domestic rebellion. This ensured that no group of pacifistic or disloyal officials could allow the US to be overrun by an aggressor by denying citizens the right to defense of their country by locking them up for organizing militias.

      That being said, I fail to see where it is the responsibility or duty of the federal government to make laws or decisions on what items a person may buy in his or her own state. Our Constitution is one of enumerated powers; what you see is what you get. Congress is given the power to regulate interstate commerce. If I buy a gun at a local store, it doesn't qualify. Now, my state can certainly regulate which and how many weapons I may purchase, and they may also bar me for specific reasons (such as criminal background). What I see all too often lately is the federal government thinking it somehow has control over all the states. Reading the Constitution, one ought to get the feeling that the federal government was created specifically to carry out the tasks that would have caused individual states to argue amoungst themselves (such as interstate commerce). The idea being: let them argue in the congress, and let the law made there stand as law everywhere. What a state decides to let its own citizens do within the confines of that state should not be regulated by the federal government - and when it is, that state's very sovereignty is at stake. We are citizens of our state first, our nation second, our planet third. The US Constitution is a convenient arrangement between numerous seperate and soveriegn states.

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    17. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      How does mentioning an acceptable right to bear arms constitute any idea that guns are otherwise outlawed?

      Misquotes, shitty logic -- what's the difference? You don't know any more what you are talking about than the people you are so in awe of.

    18. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by shepd · · Score: 1

      >How does mentioning an acceptable right to bear arms constitute any idea that guns are otherwise outlawed?

      I simply explained that:

      "Guns are outlawed unless you are part of a well regulated Militia."

      This is your law, and is part of your constitution. If you don't like it, sorry, you're either going to have to have another civil war, or find another country to live in (assuming you're from the US).

      >You don't know any more what you are talking about than the people you are so in awe of.

      You are so fucking wrong. Read the goddamn constitution. I linked to it for fucks sakes. Read it. I assume you can read -- but then again, you appear to have chosen not to read my post, so perhaps I am wrong.

      The fact that the NRA only pays attention to half the sentence doesn't mean the first half doesn't exist. It does, and I doubt even 10% of all firearms owners in the US are part of a well regulated militia. That is if they are part of a militia at all!

      >Misquotes, shitty logic -- what's the difference?

      If you think the US constitution is fully of shitty logic, I might be inclined to agree with you. I mean, if it weren't full of shitty logic, how does the DMCA exist?

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    19. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      Pay closer attention. Declaring something to be legal in a particular circumstance by no means indicates it is outlawed in all other circumstances. Maybe YOU should read the goddamn constitution? You could only be correct if per the "rights not enumerated going to the states" clause (which would not apply given it IS enumerated in the constitution) that guns were outlawed by the states. I am aware of no such action having taken place (IANAL, but I think the NRA would have made some kind of public mention of this.) The shitty logic I was referring to was yours, not that of the constitution. BTW, I didn't see that the DMCA is actually in the constitution, so I can only assume it is your shitty logic at play again. I assume you were referring to it not having been challenged on constitutional grounds yet, but were unable to present your thoughts in a well-communicated manner.

    20. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      Ah, to further add a situation where this would apply, since it wouldn't neccesarily be the states. The constitution could have said something like this, which would outlaw guns outside the militia context (notwithstanding the current legal findings of the Supreme Court over an extended period of time saying that this right does NOT exclusively belong to militias, but also the ordinary people):

      A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Otherwise, there is no right to bear arms."

    21. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by shepd · · Score: 1

      >I assume you were referring to it not having been challenged on constitutional grounds yet

      Nope.

      >I didn't see that the DMCA is actually in the constitution

      1st amendment rights make it illegal, and even after it being challened, it still seems to be law (oh well). I need say no more on this topic, I hope.

      >Declaring something to be legal in a particular circumstance by no means indicates it is outlawed in all other circumstances.

      Fine. By your logic, since in Canada it isn't specifically defined that the double yellow line in the middle of the road requires you not to pass (because the roads are often covered with snow, which obscures these lines) if I pass when it isn't safe to do so (ie: oncoming traffic which has to slam on its brakes, but doesn't hit me) I'm perfectly legal to do so, right?

      Just because it isn't specifically outlawed doesn't make it legal, either.

      Now, if individual states have decided to make guns legal, that's bully for them. But I have a problem with people misquoting the constitution as if it is what gives them the rights, as US citizens, to individually bear arms.

      In your opinion, does the constitution specifically make the ownership of guns by random individuals a right, or a privlege? Because, unless you are legally entitled to it as a right specifically, it's a privlege, like a driver's license, that the government decides as to wether you get it or not.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    22. Re:Walmart, thinking of the children by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      If it isn't illegal, it must therefore be legal. What logic do you have disputing this? Your stand makes entirely no sense.

      I don't know shit about Canadian traffic laws, but if you are required not to pass, then I would assume it would HAVE to be specifically defined. Whether or not the road is covered in snow wouldn't have anything to do with it -- but if it was covered in snow and you couldn't have known then I imagine you wouldn't worry so much about prosecution, since that would obviously be a case with a large potential hole. Also, you wouldn't necessarily be perfectly legal to pass if there might be some other law you'd be breaking like those pertaining to reckless driving or things like that.

      The constitution does give individuals the right to bear arms. That has been affirmed over and over. My reading sees that militias are mentioned, but the "right of the people" is specifically enumerated. It is clearly not referring to a standing army. It does not seem to require membership in a militia. It leaves open the possbilibty that these people could be militia members, or they might form one as needed. Of course, I am not a legal scholar, so I am not fully aware of the various schools of thought but you could read up on the various legal decisions of the Supreme Court. In either case (and DMCA included) until it is struck down as unconstitutional then it is constitutional. It's sort of like the concept of innocent until proven guilty, you know?

  42. Ye-ha by houseofmore · · Score: 0

    Anyone with a bit of self respect wouldn't really shop at any of those store would they?

    1. Re:Ye-ha by RedWolves2 · · Score: 1

      I buy my games at Toys R Us they have a pretty good selection.

  43. its almost as if by RedWolves2 · · Score: 1

    It is almost as if these stores are owned by AOL Time Warner. They have the same philosophy which is we know what is best for our customers.

  44. Mirror of the movie (Quicktime) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://jmorton.ezrez.com/downloads/mov_01.mov

  45. Acclaim Responds To Criticism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    When Acclaim was asked to comment on the current situation, the CEO had this to say:

    "I am outraged that consumers are even THINKING that we are targeting children. Every CD bought comes with a EULA that requires them to return the merchandise if they are not at least 21 years old."

    When asked why Acclaim gives 5 packs of Pokemon Trading Cards with each purchase, he had no comment.

  46. Even a GameCube release by joeflies · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Even more suprising is that it's getting a game cube release, a platform that has segmented out a family environment. Nintendo's the same company that refused to give a 3rd party publisher (wasn't it akklaim as well) to use "red" blood in Mortal Kombat 2 for SNES (it was changed to grey to give the illusion of sweat).

    Yes, I know Nintendo's changed their policy over the years to accomodate fighting, but I'm surprised that they are going beyond the line that WalMart draws.

    1. Re:Even a GameCube release by Trinn · · Score: 1

      Don't forget about Conker's Bad Fur Day...admittedly it was vulgarity for comedy's sake but it was there nonetheless. I personally thought the game (the small amount I played of it at my friends' houses) was rather boring and unimaginative but that is beside the point. My point is that Nintendo has indeed shifted their policy and realizes that their core audience is the standard kiddie audience, as well as what used to be the kiddie audience around the time of the NES.

    2. Re:Even a GameCube release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guns do not kill people. Owning a gun does not motivate people to kill people. Hunting does not motivate people to kill people. Target shooting does not motivate people to kill people.

      People kill people. People's past and present environment motivate them to kill people.

    3. Re:Even a GameCube release by Psx29 · · Score: 2

      Mortal Kombat 2 for SNES has red blood in it, it's Mortal Kombat 1 your thinking of

    4. Re:Even a GameCube release by asteinberg · · Score: 1

      The Gamecube is often considered to be more "family-oriented" than the PS2 or XBox, but I think Nintendo has recently been trying to shed this reputation to make its system more appealing to an older audience. Think about the recent Gamecube advertising campaign. This game, and the publicity that comes with it, would seem to fit that trend rather nicely.

      --
      The first ever Ultimate Frisbee video game: here (now
    5. Re:Even a GameCube release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus Christ! Does a game have to be bloody and have boobies for it to not be considered a kiddie game?

      And Mortal Kombat 2 for SNES /has/ blood in it. Actually, I would say it was the best console version of the game. Mortal Kombat 1 did not have blood in it. Did that make it boring? Nay.

  47. tough decision by carpe_noctem · · Score: 2

    hrmmm...if I want to look at digital images of boobs, I think I'll just go look at some porn online and save myself the 20$ for the game and the hour of boredom of playing the game (just to see the digital boobs, nonetheless). ;]

    --
    "Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
    1. Re:tough decision by karnal · · Score: 2

      Nitpick -

      If you're going online, aren't you seeing digital boobs? (granted, they were "analog" at one point... perhaps that's why they tend to be "smoother" than digital boobx....)

      --
      Karnal
  48. Bravo...almost by Longinus · · Score: 2

    I'm and old school gamer. I prefer things 2D over 3D, and think that then quality of the industry has taken a major dive since the popularization of the Playstation (and the ensuing "Playstation Generation) and blatant T&A based franchises like Tomb Raider et al. Naturally, I abhor BMX XXX to its core and wish nothing more than it's utter failure (and the failure of shovelware, gimmicky publishers like Acclaim). Because of this, my first reaction to this news was one of adulation if for no other reason than that this refusal to carry the game will result in fewer sales and send a message to Acclaim to maybe try making a real game instead of peddeling sex to horndog high-schoolers who for some reason think polygonal tits are real neat (trust me guys, flesh is much better).

    However, upon further reflection, I realized that a bocott like this on the part of retail chains goes against something I value greatly: freedom. By not carrying these games, not only have Wal-Mart and others create undue hype and press for this piece of shit, but effectively takes power and freedom away from consumers to make their own choices by making them for them. This is not a good thing.

    So, as much as I hope this game gets rejected "like a 32X-Sega Virtual Boy Hybrid from Atari*," I wish more that retail chains would stop making choices for consumers and creating hype for crap like this. We're the only ones it hurts, and Acclaim (the company who tried to advertise on grave headstones and offered $10,000 to the first couple to name their child "Turok") is banking on just this kind of publicity.

    *Thanks to Dave Halverson of Play and formerly of GameFan for that tastey quote.

    1. Re:Bravo...almost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christ, you're a boring schmuck. Are you by any chance a relative of the comic-book guy from the Simpsons?

    2. Re:Bravo...almost by stantron77 · · Score: 1

      I have to disagree with you on at least one of your points. A retail chain deciding not to carry it in no way goes against freedom. I think you are confused on what freedom in this case entails. Every company can choose what they do and do not sell as long as it's a legal product. They have the freedom to make their choice on their inventory. If the government wanted to ban this game then you would have an issue, but not every store will carry exactly what you want. That's why there are other stores that will pick up that demand if it is big enough. This is capitalism. If you are upset Walmart won't carry this then feel free to boycott them all you want and cast your vote with your wallet, but if a store doesn't want to carry something because they disagree with it they are more than free to do so.

      --
      "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." - Pla
  49. More nonsense from Slashcrap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'DrEnter writes "According to this Yahoo article, Wal-Mart, Toys R Us, and Kay-Bee Toys'

    "Toys 'R Us", moron.

    'Best Buy has stated it will sell a censored version of the game.'

    "Best Buy has stated THAT it will..."

    'Acclaim is billing it as the first major release game'

    "Major-release" game you idiot.

    'with prostitutes and pimps and main characters.'

    "prostitutes and pimps AS main characters." Jesus!

    'I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart sells rated-R movies(including those arguably targeted at the same age group as this game is), so make your own judgement..."'

    It sounds like you are trying to influence us, dolt.

    What "news" site carries such subjective work as this crap? Rot in hell.

  50. Walmart Censorship by _LFTL_ · · Score: 1
    A Wal-Mart spokesman stated "We're not going to carry any software with any vulgarity or nudity -- we're just not going to do it." I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart sells rated-R movies (including those arguably targeted at the same age group as this game is), so make your own judgement..."

    I'm not sure about R-rated movies, but Wal-Mart has a pretty long history of censorship including sanitizing CDs, and refusing to sell magazines with "indecent" covers. So this move doesn't really surprise me, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that they refused to sell certain R-rated movies for the same reasons (whatever they are).

    1. Re:walmart censorship by Belgand · · Score: 2

      Censored R-rated films? Hardly. They definitely censor cds, but not film. Sure some of the dvds lack slipcases and such in some bizzare move that has nothing to do with censorship, but they're not changed in any way. When I picked up a copy of Return of the Living Dead there a few weeks ago due to an excellent price it still had plenty of zombie action and full-frontal nudity.

  51. Thank Goodness... by mythosaz · · Score: 2, Funny

    Thank goodness Wal-Mart still sells shotguns and rifles in the sporting goods section. (Milage in your state my vary..)

  52. Pervsion by Beebos · · Score: 2

    IMHO, people who are afraid of the human body and sex are the perverted ones. I'm willing to bet that sex is one of the most frequently repeated activities on the planet. Therefore, its is a normal, healthy human activitiy.

    All you christian zelots and psycologically repressed people are on the outside of normal group, not the inside. Censorship, even voluntary self-censorship, is sicker than any sexual activity between consenting adults.

    1. Re:Pervsion by PhxBlue · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Someone doesn't have to be "psychologically repressed" just to disagree with you about what represents normal human behaviour and what represents perversion, you know. As long as they're not trying to tell you how to live your life, it's kinda impolite to call them names.

      On a side note, I've met a fair number of "zealots" who aren't Christian, too. Zealots come in all shapes and sizes: Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Pagan, etc.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    2. Re:Pervsion by Beebos · · Score: 1

      Again, IMHO, it would be just as absurd for Walmart to refuse to sell a video game because it portrayed people eating or sleeping as it is for them to refuse to sell a game because it showed the human body or people engaging in sex.

      These people ARE telling me how to live my life, because they won't let me, a 37 year man, even buy it. Walmart, and the wackos who have picketed retailers in the past, are puting their values over mine. In a lot of places, Walmart may be the only outlet for video games. I agree that minors should not be able to buy stuff like this, but to bannish it altogether from the store because it shows the human body in its natural state is definitively preverse.

      Yes, of course, there are non-Christian zelots. This will get me in a lot of trouble, and its just my opinion, but I beileve that followers of any religion are irrational, bordering on mentaly ill.

    3. Re:Pervsion by CommieOverlord · · Score: 1

      Zealots come in all shapes and sizes: Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Pagan, etc.

      Don't forget Atheist.

    4. Re:Pervsion by sacherjj · · Score: 2

      Again, IMHO, it would be just as absurd for Walmart to refuse to sell a video game because it portrayed people eating or sleeping as it is for them to refuse to sell a game because it showed the human body or people engaging in sex.

      These people ARE telling me how to live my life, because they won't let me, a 37 year man, even buy it. Walmart, and the wackos who have picketed retailers in the past, are puting their values over mine. In a lot of places, Walmart may be the only outlet for video games. I agree that minors should not be able to buy stuff like this, but to bannish it altogether from the store because it shows the human body in its natural state is definitively preverse.


      Oh Please... How is WalMart telling you how to live your life by not selling you the game? Is WalMart the only source of the game? NO. You obviously have connection to the internet and posted here. Give some site your credit card number and a guy or gal in a funny outfit will deliver a package to your house with all the smut you desire. If I had a restaurant, I would not serve alcohol. If I had a store, I would not sell cigarettes. This would hurt my bottom line somewhat, but I don't use or would want to be associated with distributing either substances. How would this be telling you how to live? Go to the competition and buy it there. If there is demand, there is always a source. Even if the product is illegal. Stop whining about how people are telling you how to live your life. No one is.

    5. Re:Pervsion by Beebos · · Score: 1

      Cigarettes kill. Alcohol kills. SEX IS THE BEGINNING OF LIFE.

      Only primtive, backwards, psycologically difficient people are so afraid of a basic human function that they would try to prevent the sale of a BMX game because it contain depictions of the human body in its natural state. The presence of this game in a store is NOT going to corrupt anyone. How fragile are you that a disk in a box in a store with tens of thousand of other products sends you into a panic.

      How totally beyond reason is it that at Walmart I can't buy a freaking game with some tits in it, but I could buy a sniper rifle and become a copycat of that psyco in D.C.?

      There is nothing immoral, bad, evil, corrupting, dirty or shameful about the human body. Anyone who thinks there is needs years of therapy.

      Walmart is the largest retailer in the U.S., if you don't understand the dangerous precident of this stupid form of censorship, you do not deserve to live in a democracy.

    6. Re:Pervsion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who said anything about the human body being shameful? Walmart's banning of this is not reflective of them being anti-sex, it is reflective of them being anti-pornography. (They are two very different things, one is a healthy part of a relationship between husband and wife, another is a disrespectful, and frankly pitiful thing).

      This game is simply throwing in nudity as a shallow attempt to make more sells. How is that a good thing and why are you so up in arms to defend it and attack the 'evil censoring store'? The only thing I picture when I think of this is some overweight balding greedy guy at Acclaim thinking about how much money he's making off it.

      Come on kids (and adults acting like kids) instead of looking at naked women on the computer screen and in magazines why don't you gain some social skills, start a meaningful relationship, and with some luck see a REAL woman naked?

    7. Re:Pervsion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for your beautiful prose. Now, after reading this I have realized the error of my ways. You're right, I do not deserve to live in this democracy, but if I promise to never disagree with you again can I please not have to leave?

      Pretty please?

    8. Re:Pervsion by Beebos · · Score: 1

      So in your world, only married people can have sex or see the human body.

      What a sad, boring world you live in.

      I agree that a BMX game with naked women in it is a little silly, but it is in no way harmful or disrespectful and not worthy of censorship.

      Why is a depiction of the human body disrespectful? You might be surprised to find that a lot of women and men like showing off their body. It doesn't take away from their humanity, their intelligence, their morals or their character.

      By the way, the word pornography was coined by prutianical zelots and used to be applied to even verbal descriptions of husbands and wives kissing. Should Walmart ban the selling of that?

    9. Re:Pervsion by Beebos · · Score: 1

      No, get out now!

    10. Re:Pervsion by jimmyharris · · Score: 1
      On a side note, I've met a fair number of "zealots" who aren't Christian, too. Zealots come in all shapes and sizes: Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Pagan, etc.

      You forgot Linux...

  53. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by reallocate · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doubtful that there's connection between this and lax parental responsibility. Different parents raise their kids differently.

    This is about WalMart, et al, making a decision about what they'll sell or not sell, and also avoiding a great deal of bad publicity by carrying the games. The game section of these stores are meccas for kids; no store manager wants to explain to the local news folks why they let school kids buy the games.

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
  54. usa == sick perverts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just got back from USA - love Americans had a ball working with them - but you guys have lost the plot!! I can go into Wal-mart and pick up a box of shot gun shells, more guns and instruments of death than I have ever seen in my life and baby camoflage outfits for "Daddys little hunter" - but the sight of a womans nipple or a baby suckling will destroy the fabric of society?
    You've got some sniper running around taking pot shots at anyone in the wrong place, kids shooting school kids and tv news showing people with blood spurting out and dying - but don't mention sex!! Some New Yorker was taken down for fare evasion - a whole $1.50 - good to know the value of life!

    I'd rather have my kids making love than shooting each other We all have a body - we don't all have guns.

    1. Re:usa == sick perverts by EnsGDT · · Score: 1

      you must be some british liberal sick anti-gun bastard, cause otherwise, I cant find any explination for the BS that you're spouting. Just cause you damn european naturists can't stand the fact that the USA is so secually uptight, it doesn't mean that you have the right to critisize one of out hardest won and dearly loved rights as an american citizen. Sure, we have to deal with people like this sicko sniper, but in the long run, it's worth it to maintain our certian inalienable rights.

    2. Re:usa == sick perverts by Prince_Ali · · Score: 1

      Have fun living under the crown, assclown!

    3. Re:usa == sick perverts by trotski · · Score: 1

      uropean naturists can't stand the fact that the USA is so secually uptight

      Ummmmm.... I'm sorry I'm new to this but what does secually mean exactly? Are you trying to say SEXUALLY? Or do you mean something else.

      --

      "Entropy is the bad-guy, and he is everywhere"
    4. Re:usa == sick perverts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Silly man.

      Don't you know that happiness is a warm gun?

      And the guy who said that was British!

    5. Re:usa == sick perverts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I'd rather have my kids making love than shooting
      > each other

      With each other? Man, thats some fucked up, repugnant, shit.

    6. Re:usa == sick perverts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      yeah but he was singing about his meat pistol.

    7. Re:usa == sick perverts by akadruid · · Score: 1

      As a 'british liberal sick anti-gun bastard', I don't find your dearly loved right to be a attractive idea. Strict anti-gun laws do make our streets safer than yours.
      Surely your main need to carry a firearm is as a defenese against a violent society?
      Unless you are a drug dealer or mafia boss :)

      --
      "Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything." (attrib. Joseph Stalin)
  55. Well my kids know by s4ltyd0g · · Score: 1

    not to be bringing home video games with themes of sex and violence. It's got to be either one, or the other... (-;

  56. The math is simple... by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 1

    WalMart can choose what they want to carry. They did the following analysis:
    (# people we will piss off by selling their kids a porn game)*(# people each of them will get to boycott our store)*($$ those people would otherwise spend here)
    vs
    (# people we would buy a porn game at WalMart, of all places)*(price of the game) + (# people who will boycott WalMart for not selling porn)*(percentage of those people that don't already know WalMart doesn't sell porn)*($$ they would otherwise spend)

    It isn't hard to figure out that the first number is bigger :-)

    --
    I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
  57. I might buy it... by glenebob · · Score: 2

    but not until I get to check out the screen shots!!!

    1. Re:I might buy it... by glenebob · · Score: 2

      Oh my... Acclaim is censoring their own game screenshots!

  58. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by Danse · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's no reason they would have to allow kids to buy the game. They card for other things, why not this?

    --
    It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  59. Walmartized PCs... by mmol_6453 · · Score: 2

    ...are a good thing, though. :)

    Censoring PCs...And I thought I hated all forms of censorship.

    --
    What's this Submit thingy do?
  60. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by KingJoshi · · Score: 2, Interesting
    This isn't these stores taking "responsibility", its them acknowledging that the parents who can't police their children properly will shove their responsibility (that of the parents) onto the store. The fact is, if parents were able to actually take care of their children, it wouldn't matter if hard-core pornography was shelved next to Barney cartoons - the kids wouldn't ever actually get access. My parents made it quite clear whenever I was not to be doing something, and when I went behind their backs I was inevitably punished. More importantly, they explained their reasons for each edict, and as a result I respected their decisions as my parents instead of resenting them blindly. Thats the lesson the stores are teaching parents: if you dont take care of your kids, we'll do it for you. Thats plain fucking lazy.

    Walmart and the other stores are doing this for their image, plain and simple. It's a business move and they don't want to lose any conservative customers. The fact they'll carry rated-R movies that contain tons of violence, sexual dialogue or nudity and not this game seems ridiculous.

    However, I would applaud any company that did such an action based upon principle (and was consistent with their actions). The fact is, most people don't have good parents. We're fortunate. So what should happen to the many kids out there without good parents? The rest of society (businesses, government, other community members) MUST raise them properly. It's our obligation to society and the kids. We need to try to educate and improve the parents, but the kids (and society) will be the ones to suffer if the rest of society doesn't take up the slack.

    Walmart isn't sending any message to the parents because the bad parents don't even know what's going on or care. They're not going to learn any lesson here from this. In this case, I disagree with Walmart, but I agree in the principle of raising others' children and preserving an image of yourself.

    --
    In times like these, it is helpful to remember that there have always been times like these. - Paul Harvey
  61. Game Details: by stockpile · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm a store manager for one of the video game chains that will be selling BMX XXX, and last month I got a chance to hear about the game from the people at Akklaim and even saw a bit of game footage. Here is what I took away from the preview: 1) This game plays like the old dave mirra games, but with more plot thrown into each stage ( pimps yelling at their employees, monkeys throwing poo, dogs fornicating) 2) Somebody went to great pains to give you the ultimate control in the create a skater mode including breast size and (abscence of) choice of clothes. 3) If you get enough money, you get to go to Scores gentleman's club to watch a video clip of a real dancer. 4) The Gamecube and XBOX versions will have a raunch-o-meter to let you turn off nudity and bad language while the PS2 version will automatically be a little more tame (no full nudity). 5) They made sure to stay in the M rating, as an Ao would mean that the rest of the chains that are selling the game would also drop it from their shelves.
    Basically, it looks like annother lame BMX game that Akklaim is trying to boost sales of by tossing in a little raunch. A good buy, if you have no life or acess to better adult materials.

    1. Re:Game Details: by Jeremi · · Score: 2

      Let's face it, the allure of this game isn't the BMX simulation, it's the real time full-physics hyper-realistic simulation of young firm bouncing breasts. Frankly, they'd probably sell better if they dropped the 'game' part and sold it as 3D Studio Max add-on.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    2. Re:Game Details: by bwalling · · Score: 2

      This game plays like the old dave mirra games, but with more plot thrown into each stage ( pimps yelling at their employees, monkeys throwing poo, dogs fornicating)

      If you want to call that plot...

  62. Shoot to kill by Darthbert · · Score: 1

    I'm making a trip to Wal-Mart to pick up a few firearms for use in our revolt against Wal-Mart's stance of not carrying violent video games, any takers? We can pick up some Alcohol and live ammunition while we're there. hypo...hypo...crit? I think that's the word...

  63. Its the target audience by WotanKhan · · Score: 1

    What age group are BMX games targeted at? Now add the porn...see the problem?

    1. Re:Its the target audience by The_dev0 · · Score: 1

      Right, but this game is obviously targeted at the more mature user with the sexual content. Sheesh, it'll be at least R18+ rated, so it won't even be available to children. The same argument could be used for animation or music, too. Just because it seems to the casual passer-by that the game is aimed at a certain demographic, it doesn't make it true. I could rattle off stacks of titles that appear to be children's games (graphically), but the puzzles or content are obviously aimed at a higher age group. I feel the same applies to this. Whether it's a BMX game or tiddlywinks, games can be enjoyed by all age groups. I don't think it is up to a retail store to pretend to be our moral compass.

      --
      Never fight naked, unless you're in prison...
  64. In other news... by Fished · · Score: 4, Insightful
    And, in other news, Toys-R-Us has declined to give shelf space to "Anal-Sex Barbie". This decision was greeted with shock and derision by free speech advocates, who felt that the elimination of one "slippery slope" might destroy them all."

    I must admit, I'm a bit confused as to when, in the eyes of "Your Smut Online" retailers lost the right of choosing how to stock their shelves while, somehow, you retain the right to buy it. You have a right to speak: you don't have a right to make me or anyone else listen.

    --
    "He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
  65. Reasons I like Wal-Mart anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're open 24 hours. Okay, so is Albersons (a supermarket similar to Winn-Dixie, Kroger, Piggly-Wiggly, Publix, etc.) but you can't buy oxy-Mapp(tm) torches or marine deep cycle batteries at Albertsons. Hell, you can even buy a jon boat, trolling motor (Sorry, it won't help you with /. trolling), fishing poles, bait, coolers, beer, and fishing license, at 3:00AM if you felt the need.

    Very lenient return policy. That old CGA card not quite up to snuff for the latest Quake engine? No problem! Just buy a geforce3 and stuff your old card back in the box and bring it back. The friendly folks at the Wal-Mart return counter can't tell the difference.

    Super Wal-Marts mean you can get groceries too! Need a USB joystick, a bag of beef jerky, some Jolt cola, a whole turkey and an Audigy? You can get all this and more at a super Wal-Mart.

  66. Did they actually do anything to improve gameplay? by jasonditz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As far as I can tell this is just Dave Mirra 3 with new levels and boobies. Why does letting you ride your bike past dogs having sex make this a revolutionary title? Why should people who didn't buy the last BMX title (or bought it and wish they hadn't) bother with this? Give the public a little credit Acclaim, at least GTA3 was fun to play. I'd work on fixing the glaring play control issues in your title before I go: "Hey, our game isn't selling, I know, lets stick some titties in it, that'll make it edgy"

  67. Christians LIKE sex! by anomaly · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a zealous Christian, (dare I admit that I might be categorized as a 'fundie' by the /. crowd?)

    I can say that I am not afraid of the human body. I like sex quite a bit, too.

    That having been said, I believe that God designed sex to be expressed in the context of an emotionally intimate committed relationship. One reference that discusses sexual satifaction survey results is here
    Apparently Christians have higher rates of sexual satisfaction than non-Christians.

    With regard to censorship, perhaps Walmart is making decisions based on what their customers want. The marketplace is free, and I don't get up in arms when your favorite pr0n store refuses to carry Jonah - If you want the game, you know where you can find it - Google is your friend.

    Respectfully,
    Anomaly
    BTW - God loves you and longs for relationship with you.
    If you would like to know more, please email me.

    --
    But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    1. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Beebos · · Score: 1

      IMHO, God does not exist.

      You are free to believe anything you want.

    2. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, according to what you said in your earlier comment we're not free to believe anything we want. Rather, we are only free to believe the say way you believe, but if we even dare agree with Walmart in banning a game that exploits women in an attempt to make up for it's lack of content then we, how was it you said it? Don't deserve to live in a democracy?

      At least keep some consistancy.

    3. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by ElitusPrime · · Score: 1

      Well said. I must admit that I'm pleasantly surprised that you got modded up. Maybe there's hope for /. yet... :-)

      --
      The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried. -G.K. Chesterton
    4. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BTW - God loves you and longs for relationship with you.

      a/s/l?

    5. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

      As a zealous Christian, (dare I admit that I might be categorized as a 'fundie' by the /. crowd?)

      I can say that I am not afraid of the human body. I like sex quite a bit, too.


      That having been said, I believe that God designed sex to be expressed in the context of an emotionally intimate committed relationship

      err ... i think you might be reading your book wrong.
      you might wanna go back and have a look at it again.

      btw, youve been told that so that youll believe that you are something special, as opposed to simply an animal like the rest of the species that inhabit the planet. that much should be easy to see.

      sigh ... make a creature self aware and he will think he is the center of universe.

    6. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by ttys00 · · Score: 1
      Apparently Christians have higher rates of sexual satisfaction than non-Christians.


      Maybe that has more to do with only ever having sex with one person? They don't have any better or worse sex to compare their current sex with.

      If you asked non Christians who had only slept with one person, I'm sure you'd get higher rates of satisfaction in that segment of people as well.
    7. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by bwalling · · Score: 2

      err ... i think you might be reading your book wrong.
      you might wanna go back and have a look at it again.


      Go read Song of Solomon (or Song of Songs, depending on your Bible). There is plenty about sex in there. You can find plenty of copies of the Bible on the Internet if you don't have a copy.

    8. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Rhinobird · · Score: 2

      I don't get up in arms when your favorite pr0n store refuses to carry Jonah

      You're right that movie would fit right in...boobs, boobs, boobs, giant talking cucumber, butt, boobs...

      --
      If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
    9. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by @madeus · · Score: 2

      Being a religious fundamentalist is not something to be proud of.

      A mature human being can be ethical, responsable and moral without having to lean on religion.

      God does not love me, got does not exist and I am happy with that.

      If he thinks other wise, he can come round to my house this weekend and I'll give him a damn good kicking.

    10. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by anomaly · · Score: 2

      I think that it is logically and intellectually difficult to hold that position. If you would care to hear why I believe that being an atheist is irrational, please email me.

      Respectfully,
      Anomaly

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    11. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by anomaly · · Score: 2

      When I say "fundamentalist" I meant that I hold closely to the fundamental teachings of the Christian faith.

      With all due respect, I submit to you that absent God, there is no objective standard for ethics, or morality.

      I think that from an intellectual and reasoned perspective it is challenging to hold to an atheistic world view. If you woul like to hear why, please reply or email me.

      Regards,
      Anomaly

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    12. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by anomaly · · Score: 2

      WRT "one person" - Can you really be sure? Why is sex with lots of people "better" than sex with one?

      Ejaculation feels great - no matter what the stimlus that gets you there, but that feeling is over in a matter of seconds and then what determines satisfaction is the emotional component.

      I've got an emotional closeness with my wife that people who have one night stands could never have. We accept each other's flaws and imperfections and make a conscious choice to value each other and give ourselves to each other sexually.

      People who have little or no commitment - just sex - are not looking to give anything to the other person - they are just looking to "get some."

      How satisfying can it be when a) you are just looking for orgasm, b) your partner is just looking for orgasm, and you both know it? How can it be anything other than emotionally empty?

      Respectfully,
      Anomaly

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    13. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by PaganRitual · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      ... didnt see anything about an emotional commited relationship there ... must have missed it.

    14. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      A mature human being can be ethical, responsable and moral without having to lean on religion.


      What I don't understand is why people can't accept that a person can be reasonable, logical, mature, AND lean on religion.
    15. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      F'cryin' out loud... why, on a website frequented by rabid Libertarians are Christians always jumped on by atheists like a pack of pirahna? Should we return the favor? Is that what you're looking for? Some justification for your vitriol?

    16. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by 2short · · Score: 1

      "With all due respect, I submit to you that absent God, there is no objective standard for ethics, or morality"

      I submit to you that there is in fact no objective standard for morality. It might be nice if there were, but that doesn't make it so. Ascribing your own subjective morality to an unprovable higher power is just an excuse to inflict it on others without stepping up and taking responsibility for it yourself. I do not believe in God, yet I do my best to act morally, as my conscience dictates. If you do something I think is wrong, I will tell you *I* say that is wrong, and I will do what I can to stop you.
      I'm pretty sure I don't want to hear why you think it's challenging to be an atheist, but I'll tell you I agree. It is challenging. Self delusion is easy.
      Damn, that came off harsher than I intended. But I really hate the implication that atheists are immoral. All humanity are guided by our own conscience. Some of us claim the dictates of our conscience actually come from an invisible super-being, and are hence more important than everyone elses.

    17. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Tikiman · · Score: 1
      F'cryin' out loud... why, on a website frequented by rabid Libertarians are Christians always jumped on by atheists like a pack of pirahna? Should we return the favor? Is that what you're looking for? Some justification for your vitriol?

      I think it's that many non-Christians simply do not feel comfortable with Christian concepts of sin and accountability. Many people just want to live their life the way they want and don't want anyone telling them what to do, and they view the existence Christianity as some kind of personal attack. This can be seen even in the responses to the original article - people do not like moral constraints being imposed on them, whether it be God doing it or Wal-Mart.

    18. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Tikiman · · Score: 1
      btw, youve been told that so that youll believe that you are something special, as opposed to simply an animal like the rest of the species that inhabit the planet. that much should be easy to see.

      So, if I happened to run you over with my car, the penalty should be no more than if I ran over a squirrel. Or I should feel no more remorse than if I killed a deer. Even most non-Christians understand that man, while still a creature, has more inherant worth than say, a dead skunk on the side of the road.

    19. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by 2short · · Score: 1

      "people do not like moral constraints being imposed on them, whether it be God doing it or Wal-Mart."

      I impose my own moral constrains upon myself, thanks. I'm not very fond of others imposing their moral constraints upon me, but what really ticks me of is their ascribing those constraints to an invisible, unprovable super-being. That's a cop out. They're just dodging the responsibility for imposing *their* constraints, and assigning *their* constraints superior status. God can explain or justify anything, and hence explains and justifies nothing. A lot of people use God to justify some perfectly fine things, but if they'd have some guts and admit it is they themselves that are making the judgements, they might have a harder time justifying terrible things.

    20. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm keen to hear (but not in email... my inbox is already filled with important time-sensative messages, so I reserve my goofing off and wasting time to slashdot)

      So why is it irrational to be an atheist ??

      To me, the notion of having faith in scriptures with preposterous stories and contradictory themes seems ludicrous.

      But there are reasons to believe, just not logical and intellectual.... it's easy (especially if taught from a young age), it social behavior and leads to social acceptance, and most importantly, it makes people feel better about themselves. Death, the ending of all one's life-long goals and accomplishments is daunting, and the silly notion that we humans somehow have an immortal "soul" that transcends the physical world is very compelling. Also incredibly compelling is the invisible friend who loves you and will forgive you no matter how badly you fuck up, no matter what heinous crime you commit, or no matter how deeply in depression and despair you may feel.

      So do tell (but publically here, not in private email) why you believe it is so illogical and intellectually difficult to disbelive in the concept of supernature beings, immortal soul, life after death (that exists as only bliss or torture), and the other vauge concepts rolled up in christianity.

    21. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First of all, who's imposing moral constraints on you? If you don't like the fact that Wal-Mart won't sell it, buy it elsewhere. No harder, and probably easier to get it online. Secondly, how do we decide whose "moral guidelines" are better? God's? Hitler's? Yours? What's your measuring stick? You talk of "justifying terrible things," but who's to say what it is that's terrible?

    22. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I do agree with a few things you think, I think you have it wrong. Being a liberatarian and an atheist I think he deserved the personal attack. Here's my justification... I live in the south... every day several people throw their god up in my face... I told, at least once a week, that I'm being prayed for... I'm told weekly that I'm going to go to hell if I don't accept Jesus...

      So, basically, if this guy has to get some sort of an attack for 20 seconds I can't really feel bad for him. Him and his religion attack my beliefs every chance they get (and yes, the church does promote trying to "convert" everyone... though I'm sure just so they can get those tithes), so it's a taste-of-your-own-medicince sort of thing. Maybe, one of these years, his kind will realize that I don't want to be barricaded with their beliefs; when that happens I'll have no more to say on the subject.

    23. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So two wrongs make a right? Did HE jump on you about anything? No. He simply expressed his opinion in a non-aggressive manner. If someone is giving you grief over Jesus, you need to take it up with them, not a random stranger online.

      Besides, does it really hurt that much to have someone praying for you?

    24. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Tikiman · · Score: 1
      I impose my own moral constrains upon myself, thanks. I'm not very fond of others imposing their moral constraints upon me, but what really ticks me of is their ascribing those constraints to an invisible, unprovable super-being. That's a cop out. They're just dodging the responsibility for imposing *their* constraints, and assigning *their* constraints superior status. God can explain or justify anything, and hence explains and justifies nothing. A lot of people use God to justify some perfectly fine things, but if they'd have some guts and admit it is they themselves that are making the judgements, they might have a harder time justifying terrible things.

      All Christians struggle on a daily basis with sin and obeying God's laws. I regret than many professing Christians come off with a "holier-than-thou" attitude, I sense this has offended you in the past. But beleive me, the last thing going through a true Christian's head is "I will twist what God wants in order to do what I want". Rather, a Christian will go far out of his way to make the morally correct decision, even if it is perhaps a difficult one and not what we want to do. The statment that "God can explain or justify anything" simply is not true - His will has been plainly revealed. For example, a Christian should not use God's name to justify killing pagans or abortion doctors. Those that do so are either not really Christians, or have been overcome by sin and really need some help. Anyway, I just wanted you understand a little more about Christian morality, and the struggles we go through trying to be moral people - the very last term I would is "cop-out".

    25. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      I think that from an intellectual and reasoned perspective it is challenging to hold to an atheistic world view.

      No, it's very easy. You simply have to disbelieve in something that there is no evidence for. Do you think it's challenging to hold the view that there is no purple giraffe reading over your shoulder right now?

    26. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Tikiman · · Score: 1
      While I do agree with a few things you think, I think you have it wrong. Being a liberatarian and an atheist I think he deserved the personal attack. Here's my justification... I live in the south... every day several people throw their god up in my face... I told, at least once a week, that I'm being prayed for... I'm told weekly that I'm going to go to hell if I don't accept Jesus... So, basically, if this guy has to get some sort of an attack for 20 seconds I can't really feel bad for him. Him and his religion attack my beliefs every chance they get (and yes, the church does promote trying to "convert" everyone... though I'm sure just so they can get those tithes), so it's a taste-of-your-own-medicince sort of thing. Maybe, one of these years, his kind will realize that I don't want to be barricaded with their beliefs; when that happens I'll have no more to say on the subject.
      I can certainly understand your frustration. No Mr Abu from Nigeria, I don't want to help complete your bank transaction. But I really don't see the connection between your frustration, and the fact that someone here "deserved" an attack. I don't think Nigeria deserves to be attacked either (yes, much of that scam spam *does* originate there). Also keep in mind that the South is a very Christian area, up here in the north east, one can go years without getting prayed for. So again, does someone here on /. "deserve" to get attacked because you live in the south as opposed to the northeast? Well, I guess you get my point. No one should feel attacked, either you by Christians or Christians by atheists.
    27. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by anomaly · · Score: 2

      What evidence would be sufficient to convince you of God's existence?

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    28. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by bwalling · · Score: 2
      Maybe that has more to do with only ever having sex with one person? They don't have any better or worse sex to compare their current sex with.

      If you asked non Christians who had only slept with one person, I'm sure you'd get higher rates of satisfaction in that segment of people as well.


      I believe it has a lot to do with the level of commitment in your relationship and the emotional depth to which you expose yourself to your partner. You could argue that Christians are more devoted to their spouse due to their following of the teachings in the Bible that guide them to be more devoted and to give more of themselves to their spouses.

      Two disclaimers:
      • I don't believe that making this argument says that non-Christians can't have good marriages - I just think it goes to the likelihood of a strong emotional foundation. (Non Christians can have very good, strong marriages - don't misinterpret what I am saying.)
      • Christians may vary. Just because someone is a Christian does not make them perfect. Likewise, it does not make them a better spouse. Christianity provides them with a good foundation from which to work.
    29. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by egomaniac · · Score: 2

      Marriage is the basic Christian family value, and the survey found that married people were happier than singles by an 18 point margin.

      This sentence from the article you cite makes me extremely suspicious. Note that the fact that married people are happier than singles potentially has nothing to do with Christianity. It could just as easily be due to the fact that married couples have a deeper emotional bond, unrelated to their religions -- and yet the author brings Christianity into the equation with the implication that it is somehow responsible. The entire article is written in this fashion, making it difficult to separate true conclusions from vague assertions.

      Further, the author's references are not well-documented (and the few I searched for did not appear to be available for free online), the author did not cite meaningful statistics directly related to Christianity, and quite clearly has strong pro-Christian biases.

      I am curious to see the facts from which these conclusions are drawn, but they are sadly not available anywhere I could find them. I did, however, manage to find countless copies of the article you linked to -- people are more concerned with the conclusions than fact-checking, it seems.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    30. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by 2short · · Score: 1

      You seem to think you have the truth about the unknowable, and that your moral code derives from a higher source than mine. Sounds pretty "holier-than-thou" to me. Other people think God's will has been plainly revealed to them too, yet for them it justifies entirely different things. Construct your idea of God apropriately, and you can in fact justify whatever you please. I do not believe in god(s). Therefore I believe your moral judgements are your own. You are responsible for them, and thus putting that responsibility on God is a "cop-out". As far as what has offended me in the past, it is not the beliefs of religious people, it is that I am expected to take their belief in God more seriously than a childs belief in Santa.

    31. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by 2short · · Score: 1

      "First of all, who's imposing moral constraints on you? If you don't like the fact that Wal-Mart won't sell it, buy it elsewhere. No harder, and probably easier to get it online."

      Understand post, then reply. I have no problem with Wal-Mart saying "we think this is immoral, we won't carry it". That's fine, no problem. My problem is with people who say "God says X is immoral" rather than "I say X is immoral.

      "Secondly, how do we decide whose 'moral guidelines' are better? God's? Hitler's? Yours?"
      We, collectively, do not decide whose moral guidelines are better. Individuals do. I have decided mine are better. Hitler probably decided his were better. Luckily a lot of people disagreed with him. God does not have moral guidelines any more than unicorns and faries do.

    32. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by jpatters · · Score: 2

      What evidence would be sufficient to convince you of God's existence?

      The fact that the universe exists and that we have free will is enough evidence to convince me that there is an intelligent creator, but I see no evidence that this being has revealed itself to mankind.

      A far more likely cause for the abundance of contridictory holy books on this planet is that people in power tend to want to design easy ways to keep their subjects under control.

      --
      "Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
    33. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Tikiman · · Score: 1
      You seem to think you have the truth about the unknowable, and that your moral code derives from a higher source than mine. Sounds pretty "holier-than-thou" to me. Other people think God's will has been plainly revealed to them too, yet for them it justifies entirely different things. Construct your idea of God apropriately, and you can in fact justify whatever you please. I do not believe in god(s). Therefore I believe your moral judgements are your own. You are responsible for them, and thus putting that responsibility on God is a "cop-out". As far as what has offended me in the past, it is not the beliefs of religious people, it is that I am expected to take their belief in God more seriously than a childs belief in Santa.
      Your logic is flawed. Its equivalent to me saying "I like tacos because they are crunchy", and you saying "Crunchiness is completely subjective. I don't believe in crunchy food. You like tacos because they have cheese". This makes no sense. Furthermore, you describe God as "unknowable". You are therefore implicitly stating that God *might* exist, but we cannot know for sure. Then how can you possibly verify whether or not I'm telling the truth if I say I get my morals from God? For all you know, perhaps I have discovered a way to communicate with the God you don't know about. Perhaps you haven't even tried to find God. Also, your use of the term "cop-out" continues to confuse me. Just what exactly am I "copping-out" of? For not claiming ownership of "love your neighbor before yourself"? For not writing I Cor 13? Sorry, but I don't deserve the credit. I don't know your story, but I do know that your position has some serious problems.
    34. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Tikiman · · Score: 1
      A far more likely cause for the abundance of contridictory holy books on this planet is that people in power tend to want to design easy ways to keep their subjects under control.

      The earliest Christians led lives of self-sacrifice and fear, and nearly all the apostles were martyred for their beliefs. For the first few hundred years in which Christians were brutally persecuted, I don't really think they were in it for polital power.

    35. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Beebos · · Score: 1

      On the whole I believe that people are free to believe what they want. Too me, that is a truism.

      There are other ideas that while I would defend your rights to believe them privately, must be vigorously challenged in public.

      People used to believe that husbands should be allowed to beat their wives or children. People used to believe that women were the property of their father or husband. People used to believe that African-Americans were not human beings.

      All of these beliefs were publically challenged and are now all but universally considered unacceptable and thank god for that.

      Luckily for us those supremely important battles are over and we can now argue on the battlefield of sexual politics. While the tide is turning, many of you still seem to think that they can decide the bounds of what is sexually appropriate.

      Some of you think same sex couples are evil if they have sex. Some of you think that only married people should have sex. Some of you think that the human body (even computer generated bodies) are somehow degrading, although you rarely explain why.

      Please spare me your extreme examples. I am only talking about consenting adults here, not children or barnyard animals.

      I am not saying that sex or images of sex should be thrust upon you. I am all for decorum. But no one will be able to see the naked BMXers unless they buy a copy of the game, take it home, and put it in their Playstation. How does that have any impact on you? If it were so perverting, how could that prevert anyone but the purchaser?

      I think you give people very little credit if you think seeing a computer generated tit will cause them to disrespect women in any way. Personally I can hold the two ideas in my head that a woman has a gorgeous body and that they are intelligent, decent people.

      If I acted in the world the way the anti-sex crowd does, then I would say close all of the churches because I don't believe that god exists and religion is a form of brainwashing or mental illness. But I don't say that. I don't try to ban the bible at bookstores or Walmart. You are free to buy any stupid thing you want to buy. Please allow me the same consideration. That is the essence of democracy. If you don't understand that, you don't know what democracy is.

    36. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      What evidence would be sufficient to convince you of God's existence?

      Hmm. Short of Him/Her/It appearing in person, it would be difficult.

    37. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      The fact that the universe exists and that we have free will is enough evidence to convince me that there is an intelligent creator

      Two questions:
      1) Why does the universe require an intelligent creator?
      2) How do you know you have free will? Maybe we're all just following a big script.

    38. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by anomaly · · Score: 2

      1) Occams's razor - Much of the material universe displays a dizzying amount of order - far more than can easily be explained merely by time and chance. The amount of precision with which the universe operates leaves the most likely explanation that of an intelligent designer.

      2) If you are a naturalist, and you sincerely believe that all that is here is on the basis of time and chance, then how can it be possible that reason and logic are valid? How do you know that your "reason" has any relevance? Might it just be gibberish? That has as at least as plausible an explanation as the "big script" idea.

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    39. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by anomaly · · Score: 2

      No evidence? Have you ever examined the evidence for Christianity? Do you even know the message of Christianity?

      There is a substantial amount of evidence that Christianity is true. If you anre interested, I would be honored to share some of it with you. Please email me for more information.

      Respectfully,
      Anomaly

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    40. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

      ill risk replying again even tho some moron is down moderating our posts ... (they clearly dont realise that unless they are an admin or however this crap works, that the more that you moderate offtopic etc, the less chance of you moderating in the future, and if you are an admin moderating this down, you are a moron anyway) ... but you have taken the standard christian argument of 'taking things out of context' to a new level ... you have taken the two words 'my love' from the entire song of solomon and pretty much said that it is the basis for sex being a loving relationship between two commited people blah blah blah ... good work ... and dont say that ive assumed too much because that is what this thread is about, so im assuming that you are replying to the original arugment. whatever. ive stopped arguing with religious morons ages ago, unfortunately its kinda like cigarettes ... you always want just one more, even tho you know its not a good idea ...

    41. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by anomaly · · Score: 2

      I know that it's bad form to quote yourself, but I wrote a synopsis of this in another posting here. Please read that and feel free to respond.

      Regards,
      Anomaly

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    42. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that for some reason sex must have an emotional component. That is by no means true. To be crude about it, making love and fucking are both sex, but not necessarily the same thing. Both can be quite fulfilling in their own ways.

      Good for you for having a loving sexual relationship with your wife. Bad for you for assuming there isn't any other way, or that yours is the only way to go.

    43. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Allaria · · Score: 1

      He's way ahead of you. Jesus. But even then people didn't believe.

      --
      If a and b in c, and a can create b, and a can create a, and b can create b, and b cannot create a, then a created c.
    44. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Allaria · · Score: 1

      people in power tend to want to design easy ways to keep their subjects under control.

      A Christian following God's will (we do it because we want to, and not because we have to) doesn't want control of anything. They want to lose all their control, and give it to God. (This is Protestant belief - that we are all equal under God)

      --
      If a and b in c, and a can create b, and a can create a, and b can create b, and b cannot create a, then a created c.
    45. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by @madeus · · Score: 2

      What I don't understand is why people can't accept that a person can be reasonable, logical, mature, AND lean on religion.

      Because it's not 'logical' nor 'reasonable' to follow main stream religious practices. They are based on faith and superstition, not on using logic.

      That's why mainstream religions have spent the over a thousand years persecuting and humiliating scientists and those trying to use logic to explain the world around us and why it still happens on US television every single day of the year.

      This is why people on /. are so very resistant to religion, this is a community of engineers, developers and hackers after all, and we don't like being persecuted and hounded by people who are resistant to change, science and to logic - to our discoveries and inventions.

      To paraphrase Spider Jerusalem in Transmetropolitan...religion comes from a time when dinosaurs still roamed the Earth and people hallucinated daily...

    46. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      1) Occams's razor - Much of the material universe displays a dizzying amount of order

      Two objections:
      1) What do you mean by 'order' and can you cite examples of things that have a dizzying amount of it?
      2) Occam's razor is not about choosing the simplest explanation. Occam's razor says, "Do not multiply entities unnecessarily". In other words, choose the explanation that requires the fewest outside influences.

      2) If you are a naturalist, and you sincerely believe that all that is here is on the basis of time and chance, then how can it be possible that reason and logic are valid?

      Didn't understand this at all. What do reason and logic have nothing to do with whether there is or is not a god?

    47. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      He's way ahead of you. Jesus. But even then people didn't believe.

      Do you have any evidence that Jesus was really the son of God? And you can't use the Bible, because that quickly leads to a circular argument.

    48. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      Have you ever examined the evidence for Christianity?

      No, because there isn't any.

      Do you even know the message of Christianity?

      Yes.

      There is a substantial amount of evidence that Christianity is true.

      Name one.

    49. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Allaria · · Score: 1

      Well, assuming that you think that Jesus actually existed (and the only good proof I have of that besides the bible is the timeline (BC/AD). Not quite sure there's anything else that old (save sanscrit and such)), Jesus could have been one of three things. 1. The son of God. 2. A good moral teacher. 3. An insane man. Disregard #1 for now, and go to #2. He was a good moral teacher. This is correct, however, would a good moral teacher tell you that he was the son of God? If we assume he wasn't the son of God and that he was proclaiming that he was, he is a liar. A liar cannot be a good moral teacher. Move to #3, was Jesus insane? This seems like the more possible one, as Jesus was healing people and proclaiming the end of the world. However, he was also a highly regarded teacher. He taught the law better than anyone before him. Now, how can anyone who knows the law through and through, and can explain it using clear parables that make complete sense, be insane? Jesus could not have been a good moral teacher if he was a liar, and he could not be insane if he is a good moral teacher. Therefore, he was(is) the son of God.

      QED

      --
      If a and b in c, and a can create b, and a can create a, and b can create b, and b cannot create a, then a created c.
    50. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      If we assume he wasn't the son of God and that he was proclaiming that he was,

      Jesus said he was the "Son of Man".

      Jesus could not have been a good moral teacher if he was a liar, and he could not be insane if he is a good moral teacher. Therefore, he was(is) the son of God.

      Except that the only evidence you have that he taught anything is in the Bible, which I already said you can't use, because it leads to a circular argument. Not to mention that the earliest gospels were probably written a good 40 years or so after he died.

    51. Re:Christians LIKE sex! by Allaria · · Score: 1

      He claimed that God was his father. Many, many times. That's what got him in trouble with the leaders.

      *shrug*

      Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ" argues this much better than I can. However, I do appreciate your politeness & such. It's always cool to meet objective people :) Thanks

      --
      If a and b in c, and a can create b, and a can create a, and b can create b, and b cannot create a, then a created c.
  68. Typical by Fiveeight · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is the problem with censorship nowadays, they're too damn cunning.

    In the past, censorship enthusiasts* were dumb, and banned works of art, stuff that people could defend on quality grounds, stuff that people would get /angry/ about not being able to obtain. Who the fuck would go through a world of trouble to get this thing available in stores?

    I hate censorship, but can I actually be bothered to complain about reduced distribution for an "extreme" sports game featuring hookers? (two /seriously/ overused themes in modern games) So when they want to ban the next Thief or Deus Ex for "encouraging criminal activity" it'll be that much harder to stop them.

    *I know that Walmart not selling != censored, but you have to consider the size of the company and the number of games they shift. When multi-billion dollar companies refuse to have anything to do with controversial and "anti-social" games then it's not long until we're all playing "The Happy Little Elves(tm)(c) go to Disneyland(tm)(r)" and "DMCA Takedown: Piracy Bust".

  69. Now that's malice! by Prince_Ali · · Score: 1

    Milkman Dan would be proud, but I am not.

  70. double standards by NeoCode · · Score: 4, Informative

    "We're not going to carry any software with any vulgarity or nudity -- we're just not going to do it."

    I just don't get these double standards. They sell all kinds of movies and videos where sex and violence are rampant. Walmart sells Sopranos, American Pie and some other R-rated dvds. I am guessing (and hoping) that they don't sell such videos/dvds to underage children.

    Then why in the world they refuse to acknowledge the ratings on the games. The rating are there for a purpose. Of all the big games that are out/coming out, violence is a big part of them. And of course, as we all know from TV, sex follows. Read and understand the the ratings on the games and stick to them. Sell the games like cigarettes if you have to, just don't give me your double standards.

  71. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by evilviper · · Score: 2

    Well if it's in a blurb, it must be completely accurate!!!

    XXX is in the damn title! I think that is a pretty clear indication that it is not a PG-13 game. Besides, you sound awfully definately about a game that you just heard about moments ago... When it comes out and you've played it, THEN you can fairly discuss the rating you think it deserves.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  72. So let me get this straight... by Chris+Brewer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Being from NZ an' all...

    Wal-mart won't sell a computer game because of a little bit of nudity, yet it continues to sell guns.

    Is there anyone _inside_ the US that doesn't find that just a tad strange?

    --
    Consultancy: If you're not part of the solution, there's money to be made in prolonging the problem
    1. Re:So let me get this straight... by EnsGDT · · Score: 1

      which point of view are you taking on this? That they should sell the game, or that they shouldn't sell either.

    2. Re:So let me get this straight... by gymbrall · · Score: 1

      Being from NZ an' all...
      Wal-mart won't sell a computer game because of a little bit of nudity, yet it continues to sell guns.
      Is there anyone _inside_ the US that doesn't find that just a tad strange?


      I'm assuming you agree that Wal-Mart/Best Buy/whoever choosing not to carry a title is based on some moral/ethical/religious notion, or the fear of being perceived to lack moral/ethics/religious values.
      So assuming that, I have to ask: 1. you believe it's immoral to own a gun? and 2. you are surprised that American demographics skew toward the right to keep and bear arms over the choice to sell a commodity associated with children (games) that contains nudity???

    3. Re:So let me get this straight... by InnovATIONS · · Score: 1

      I had read elsewhere that NZ also effectively banned GTA3 because the most stringent rating in NZ is suitable for 15 and up and the bit about using and then killing prostitutes for their money was over the top. The thing which I feel is irresponsible in all this is that BMX games are a field that usually would be predominated in sales by pre-teens. So dressing up a BMX game with racy graphics and then saying that it is only for adults is a bit like the cigarette comanies using cartoon characters and saying that they aren't marketing to kids.

    4. Re:So let me get this straight... by jameslore · · Score: 1

      Really? I can go into half the computer shops in town and find GTA3 in full view. Even the one across the road from parliament ;-)

    5. Re:So let me get this straight... by jameslore · · Score: 1

      POV is irrelevant - the point is the hypocrisy of Wal-Mart.

      Incidently, do Wal-Mart really sell guns? That's really quite alarming...

    6. Re:So let me get this straight... by Wargames · · Score: 1

      America is "the land of the free" (at least it used to be a free country before we started walling ourselves in with laws, taxes, television, air conditioning, and plain laziness).
      Guns are the symbols of freedom, the last vestiges of our God given unalienable rights to persue happiness.

      Guns : Freedom :: Sex : Bondage.

      Tie me up!

      --
      -- Each tock of the Planck clock is a new world and here we are still life. --
    7. Re:So let me get this straight... by tshak · · Score: 2

      Not to mention all the movies they sell with nudity in them.

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    8. Re:So let me get this straight... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2
      Yes, I don't understand why they will ban something as interesting and entertaining as naked women. You would think that a store which was willing to help us take advantage of our right to bear arms would also be willing to help us take advantage of the freedom of speech.

      Then again, selling one gun makes more profit than selling several copies of the game. I personally would want to buy a gun used, but I can think of places which I would go to after walmart.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:So let me get this straight... by NeuroKoan · · Score: 2

      Well, its a tough issue. I hope I never *have* to own a gun, but I'm glad that I can buy one if I feel its necessary.

      The *democracy* of America seems to be teetering on the brink of "Who's more paranoid?" The populace, or the government? The people don't want the government taking away their (our) rights and the government doesn't want the people (us) to overthrow it. Ever since the Vietnam war, the American population has become increasingly cynical and suspicious of government and I'd bet that the feeling is mutual. This state of fear has made me respect the power that guns give the populace (kinda evens the scoreboard), even though I hate the thought of ever owning one myself. I think its about time to get out of the US.

      Personally, I'd feel better if every gun in the world suddenly disappeared, but that won't happen short of an act of god (or nuclear war).

      Damn, thinking about this has made me depressed. I'm gonna go see whats on Comedy Central right now.

      --

      "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation."
    10. Re:So let me get this straight... by caudron · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The United States revolutionary war was more than just a violent overthrow of an oppressive regime, it was a philosophical revolution as well. It was a few intelligent men who said, "we can do better." Those same men also wrote extensively about the nature of authorities to corrupt, They saw the right of the populus to keep and bear arms as the only way to insure that the government had a healthy fear of its citizens. This, they believed, would help keep the government more honest than they otherwise would be.

      That is why we in the United States of America see little wrong with selling guns. As for why we aren't as keen on nudity, well, that I can't say.

      Either way, this is a moot point. Wal-Wart is as free as any other company in America to sell or not sell as it pleases. There is nothing inherantly wrong with taking a moral stand even when I don't agree with it.

      --
      -Tom
    11. Re:So let me get this straight... by Above · · Score: 2

      Guns are a constitutional right.

      Unfortunately, sex is not.

    12. Re:So let me get this straight... by Herkum01 · · Score: 1

      I think that this says it all,



      Sheila Broflovski: Just remember what the MPAA says: Horrific, deplorable violence is okay, as long as people don't say any naughty words!


    13. Re:So let me get this straight... by Zebbers · · Score: 1

      how bout how they wont sell model spraypaint, power buffers, eggs near halloween and Im sure other things to minors.

      Im sorry, but we need some serious kickass minors rights legislation, when I was younger I seriouslly hated being a 3rd class citizen with no rights. Its fucked up. I paid taxes, prolly more than half the welfare assholes in my lovely state and Im sure as hell I was and am more productive than them. Not to mention I never did anything wrong.

      Do you think it be ok to not sell power-buffers to black people?

  73. this is just sad by layyze · · Score: 1

    I cannot express how much respect I just lost for society.

    --
    -dr. layyze f. tooth PhD
  74. Screenshots :D by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 2, Informative

    here
    and here
    ..and here
    And the trailer(quicktime) is Here It looks like they just reskinned the normal models, nothing interesting. Now, if they were smart they would of got the developers from the Dead Or Alive series ;)

    --
    Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
  75. Follow the link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
  76. First with full action nudity? I think not by mfos.org · · Score: 4, Informative

    Custer's Revenge for the Atari 2600 was probably the first game that retailers would refuse to sell. Check it out here

    1. Re:First with full action nudity? I think not by freeweed · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but I think this is the first game where more than a single pixel is devoted to a woman's nipple.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  77. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by mrseigen · · Score: 1

    Because, as anyone who worked in a videogame store will tell you, immediately after refusing to sell a game to a child too young, you will have a parent burst into your shop screaming "WHY WON'T YOU SELL THIS GAME TO MY KID?".

    In terms of frustration, it's better just not to sell the damn game.

  78. Three words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  79. Give Me A Break.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it just me, or does this decision border on Censorship? And, isn't that unconstitutional?

    Oh, wait. Our nation allows itself to be goverened by a set of strict morals handed down by the Church. Wal-Mart, et all, don't want their squeaky clean images to be tarnished and suffer attacks from the one institution that seems to be above everything else.

    Even though it most likely won't, it needs to stop. Otherwise, we'll just be sheep for the rest of our lives...

  80. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does Walmart sell Penthouse / Playboy / Hustler? No?

    Do they sell Time / Field & Stream / Sports Illustrated? Yes?

    Then why isn't everyone here getting their panties in a bunch over _that_ bias? Why would not the clear policy they have for which print media they retail carry across into the electronic media they stock? Why should a retailer like Walmart make an exception for a one-trick pony console game?

    Hey, Mr. Magazine Man! Yeah, you! You're selling House & Garden, but I don't see no Juggs! What kind of friggin' hypocrite are you? Don't you know this is America, Land of the Free, and I gotta right to buy what I want where I want to? [spit]


    [sigh]
    Sometimes it seems everybody is spoilin' for a fight, but all these Walmart guys are doing is looking to make a living and not piss off their core clientele. Seems to me they're behaving sensibly.

  81. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by neocon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, I think you're missing the point -- the fact that parents have a responsibility to take care of their kids does not in any way take away a store-owner's right to decide what type of establishment he wants to run.

    Nor is this `just' about morality -- the storeowner (in this case WalMart) is making a clear business decision based on the fact that many customers will choose a store without porn in it over a store with porn in it when they take their kids shopping.

  82. See it for yourself by _fuzz_ · · Score: 2

    Here's the trailer for the xbox version. About 10MB and takes a while to load. http://xboxmovies.ign.com/xbox/video/bmxxx_1001_1. mov

    --
    47% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
  83. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by SirSlud · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Only topless nudity. The dialogue and such isn't anything worse than GTA3. No full frontals, definately no sex .. just alot of attitude. Really, if they dont sell this, they shouldn't sell GTA3.

    [sarcasm]
    yeah, its way more moral to carjack and kill people in GTA3 than it is to ride a skateboard and look at women's boobs ....
    [/sarcasm]

    This society has a rediculous double standard when it comes to what kids see and watch .. graphic violence is fine, easily found on their shelves, the heavens forbid we should see a nipple! For crying out loud ...

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  84. thats silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    walmart sells GTA3
    its one of the most fun games i've ever played but its they worst influence on ever.
    so if they sell gta3, then why wont they sell this.

  85. Come On by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

    ``I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart sells rated-R movies (including those arguably targeted at the same age group as this game is), so make your own judgement...''
    Come on. It's all just show. No store has a real objection against selling this kind of stuff, they just want to pretend they care for your kids, too. Like your kids aren't gonna leech/burn/... it if they want it...

    ---
    Famous last words:
    ``Wonder what this button does?''

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  86. Judgement by whereiswaldo · · Score: 1

    "...so make your own judgement..."

    Can we still do that these days? Now, where's my remote...

  87. seems to me like... by hahnar · · Score: 1

    If it's on compueer theres this big issue about it. For example there was this kid in my area. He hacked in and ttole an exam. He was expelled and haad criminal acttion brought againnst him. on the other hand if someone simply stole an eexam off a teacher desk or something, suspended, or maybe fail tthe course. There's this big paranoya when it comes to computers. It's like the same thing done on a somputer is much worse when done normally. Would i buy the gamme, no. But when they're already selling R-rated movies, is this this far off?

    --
    what happened to spell check? please decode the above comment to your best ability.
  88. For the LOVE of GOD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Where the hell are the SCREENSHOTS?! What the hell is wrong with you people?! Show some fucking screenshots!

  89. Separation of Chick & Skate by quitcherbitchen · · Score: 1

    It is indeed sad when a video game company sticks a bunch of video of strippers in a BMX game to sell more titles. I'm sure the audience for this game consists of the same people that watch Strip Poker on USA at 3am. Sad.

    If you want to see naked women, go buy some porn or get an internet connection. Games like this inevitably suck because developer time and financial resources were wasted in the making. Or maybe they're just covering up the fowl smell of an already horrible game. It's chicken and egg really.

    I'd just like to open up the shrink wrap of a game knowing that some quality effort went into it. Some adult content is fine as long as it is in context: (i.e. GTA 3) These publicity stunts and marketing hype are getting old.

  90. Bug 143292 by yerricde · · Score: 2

    http://www.esrb.org/power_search.asp?type=game

    I can't see that site because of Bug 143292 at bugzilla.mozilla.org.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  91. (Tan) Government-granted monopoly == censorship by yerricde · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I really dont have a problem with things like this unless it is the government (federal, state, or local) saying that something can't be sold in town, state, or country

    This doesn't apply directly to the article, but it's kinda-sorta related: Whenever a telecommunications company such as a cable company or a phone company gets a government-granted monopoly from a local government, then that company has the power to censor. Even under the strictest definition of censorship ("it's only censorship if it's done by a state"), it's still censorship because the telco's statutory monopoly prevents those who want to speak freely from setting up competing telecom services.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:(Tan) Government-granted monopoly == censorship by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

      I agree with this. However in this individual case, like you said, it doesn't really apply.

      There is no mandate saying only Wal-mart can sell video games, even if it does happen to be the only retailer in Dinkytown, AL.

  92. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by evilviper · · Score: 2

    I see... Society has a double standard because you don't like it? Give me a break.

    Nudity and Violence are two different things. Saying that one should be permitted because the other is, assumes some connection or similarity between the two. The least you could do is try to find some study that supports your point of view.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  93. Even walmart.com... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  94. how long has sex been dirty? by GunFodder · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Killing and violence have been commonplace throughout history. Sex has been pretty popular too, judging from the six billion people on our planet today. Every society condemns violence. Yet many cultures that depend on sex to propagate their values treat sex as a shameful act. Who the hell pulled that manuever?

    I doubt that historically all cultures have been so prudish. What kind of organization could propagate such a ridiculous idea to so many people? Hmmm...

    1. Re:how long has sex been dirty? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Dunno, but way back in the Middle Ages the Church set up red-light districts. The theory was if you just couldn't resist those sexual desires, it was better to do it with a whore than to corrupt a virgin.

      Those were the days! Apart from that "black death" stuff and the lousy economy, of course.

    2. Re:how long has sex been dirty? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh sex can be pretty dirty ... if your doing it right anyways ;-)

  95. Oh, that makes sense by aufecht · · Score: 1

    Because most kids could never get unspeakable amounts of the most crude forms of pornography the planet has ever known. I mean yeah, all those kids with active internet connections to their homes are hanging out on Nickelodeon.com or disney.com, right? Besides, it is far better to subject them to the exploding heads and guts strewn about a floor in a 1st person shooter then it is for them to see a little nudity and hear some curse words. What a backwards ass society we live in.

  96. Duke Nukem? by Faust · · Score: 1

    Last time I checked, Wal-Mart stocked Duke Nukem 3d and all the add ons...

    1. Re:Duke Nukem? by Student_Tech · · Score: 1

      Nah, you just need to kick its ass and chew some bubblegum.

  97. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by ricktu · · Score: 1

    Sorry but this comment is extremely flawed. Throughout the rest of the world are countries like my own that manage to have a free, democratic society without the populace being armed to the teeth. Conversely there are also plenty of countries who are absolutely saturated with guns that are still run by malevolent dictators. As far as I can see the only time I would need to start keeping guns around the house is when every other looney in my country starts carrying one... rather self defeating really.

  98. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by Yorrike · · Score: 2
    Yeah, that XXX movie was full of hard-core sex and such. Oh no, wait, it wasn't. It's just a name.

    Let's be realistic here, the game will be rated M. Simple as that. If you sell or rent an M rated game/video to a minor, at least here in New Zealand, you get fined. Simple. That's why the ratings exist.

    If Wal-Mart et al are too immature to carry this title, and feel it nessesary to release a whiney, pathetic "so there" statement to the media ("We're not going to carry any software with any vulgarity or nudity -- we're just not going to do it," Wal-Mart spokesman Tom Williams told Reuters." - what? Is he going to cry now? Grow up.), then I'll simply spend my money elsewhere.

    --

    Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?

  99. What Happened to the Right to Moral Outrage? by Xandy · · Score: 1

    Without responding to a particular message, it seems that people are commonly decrying Wal-Mart, et. al. for refusing to sell Acclaim's 'BMX XXX.' On the other hand, it seems that people applaud Acclaim for exercising its right to make the game and they're glad consumers have the right to buy it. That seems like a double-standard to me. It seems as if people would deny Wal-Mart, et. al. the right to moral outrage. People have forgotten what "tolerance" means; one defintion is, "The endurance of the presence or actions of objectionable persons, or of the expression of offensive opinions" (Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, 1913, taken from GDict). One need not approve of something in order to "tolerate" it. Voltaire said something like, "I may not like what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." People seem unquestioningly willing to defend Acclaim's "right to say it," but they don't seem equally willing to defend Wal-Mart. Acclaim has no right to Wal-Mart as a sales venue. Wal-Mart should be applauded for its expression of its freedom to choose what products will (and will not) be sold in its stores.

    1. Re:What Happened to the Right to Moral Outrage? by zztzed · · Score: 2

      Corporations have morals?

  100. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes but how about when everything is gratuitous? You just plain don't have to add this kind of trash to a BMX video game to make a good game. It's stupid. If the stuff actually added to the game, I may see it (say murder mystery game where a guy walked in on his Wife having sex and he killed the guy and you got shown this as your character figured everything out and was describing it in the end). Or something other then a BMX game. This is Walmarts point. It's stupid to sell a censored version, so the chose not to sell it. I think it's their choice. I will still buy my snack foods and caffiene there. I agree Parents should be in their kids lives, but just having this thing on display is problem enough.

    --

    Gorkman

  101. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

    Yeah but look on Walmart's shelves and see if you see any movies that have GRATUITOUS sex in them. Look for movies like Tom Hank's Bachelor Party, Hamburger the Movie, Hot Dog (skiing movie with mucho tits in it I think) and you just plain won't see it there. Anything with GRATUITOUS sex you won't find it there but if someone flashes a tit (Jamie Lee Curtis in Trading Places) you will find it there. Yeah that could be considered a little gratuitous, but there's maybe one or two seens where she bares breast. Not 30 or more! SO I don't see it as being much different.

    --

    Gorkman

  102. How about both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about farting & fucking. Has anyone else farted and came at the same time?

    1. Re:How about both by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, during unprotected anal sex, if she farts, when he comes, that might just produce a mess you don't even want to think about ...

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
  103. Let's see now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Games that glorify criminal behaviour are ok (GTA3). Games that display violent death, scattering blood and body parts is ok (just about any first-person shooter). But a games that displays NAKED BREASTS is absolutely unacceptable! Sometimes I wonder about American value systems...

  104. Ok, Wal-Mart won't sell the game but... by Howler · · Score: 0

    ..they will sell this book?

    Basically a little virtual nudity and profanity is bad but beatiality is good? hmmm...thats ba-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-d

    http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp;jserv se ssionid=6098869533fc2d0ef5655fb183fd49b99a18472ca_ 10-15-20-215.1921.1034647316677.:0f?product_id=190 3549&sourceid=0100000030130613102498

    1. Re:Ok, Wal-Mart won't sell the game but... by Howler · · Score: 0

      Sorry in my haste I accidently hit the submit button rather then preview and the link was messed up.

      Dearest Pet

  105. bigger concerns by jjshoe · · Score: 1
    to start with walmart probly has a higher gm (gross margin) on a box of pencils then they do on any of their video games.


    should we be critisizing walmart for not selling a video game thats just as raunchy as some of the movies they carry or for the fact that walmart moves into small towns and eats big loss to drop prices so low the competition has to close with and end result of walmart charging more in the end then the competition did in the start?


    i would love to have walmart explain this one to me.

    --
    -- botsex is {grep;touch;strip;unzip;head;mount} /dev/girl -t {wet;fsck;fsck;yes;yes;yes;umount} {/de
  106. Brings a tear to my eye... by Heynow21 · · Score: 1

    Black rappers and white computer programmers converge to destroy American culture. The monsters that are being raised on a diet of Tupac Shakur and Notorious B.I.G. can now play games like Hitman 2 and Grand Theft Auto (or BMX XXX -worst idea for a game ever? I digress...) while they listen. I'm not for censorship by the government, but I am for good judgement by the media companies that produce this trash. There don't seem to be any brakes on this frieght train of bad taste.

  107. Link To Trailer in QuickTime Format by Nintendork · · Score: 3, Informative
    1. Re:Link To Trailer in QuickTime Format by Nintendork · · Score: 3, Informative

      Here's another link to the same file. Try them both and see which gets the best speed.

  108. Sex in the Gameplay by Vegan+Pagan · · Score: 5, Funny

    VGs with violence always integrate it into the gameplay but VGs with nudity or sexual content make it some side bonus that isn't really part of the game.

    What if there was a video game that did integrate sex into the gameplay? In Japan they've had point-and-click dating games, but what if nudity/love/sex were part of other genres?

    For example, the Japanese have a comic book about a sex sport where a man and woman try to make the other person come first. What if there was a video game about that, styled after 1 on 1 fighting games? There'd be the usual selection of characters and backdrops, but instead of a damage bar there'd be a horniness bar. There'd be plenty of flashy special moves, but instead of doing damage they'd be foreplay moves that raise the other person's horniness bar. Horniness would also be represented visually by clothes falling off, blushing, trembling and heavy breathing. Instead of Mortal Kombat's "Fatalities" or Street Fighter's "Super Finishers" there'd be orgasm moves. I'd want an anime-style game company doing this because the Japanese put sex in their entertainment way better than Americans do.

    I also wonder if abstract or "cartoonized" sex is better than realistic sex. Think of the arguments about realistic violence vs cartoon violence. Some say that kids will be less harmed by seeing fake, cartoon violence because perhaps if kids don't see the real thing, they won't do the real thing. Others say that kids will be less harmed by seeing realistic violence because they'll see the real consequences and fear them. I don't know the answer to that argument, but I do ask: Is fake looking sex or realistic looking sex better for kids? If that 1-on-1 sex game kept the moves but hid the crotches, would it be OK for kids of all ages?

    1. Re:Sex in the Gameplay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, well, guess you've never played Battle Raper, have you? There are other games along the vein that you're sketching out, though nothing really spectacular.

    2. Re:Sex in the Gameplay by Mandomania · · Score: 3, Funny

      There is (was?) such a game whose name completely escapes me. It was an old Mac OS 8 game, and it consisted of a nude woman laying provacatively on the screen. All along the left side of the window were various sexual devices that one could use to 'pleasure' the woman.

      Funnily enough, my friend and I were in the library at university when he busted out his Powerbook to show me this game. A mutual friend happened by as we were chuckling like college freshmen and joined in on the fun. The largest library at the University of Texas was then treated to our friend scream "Use the cucumber! USE THE CUCUMBER!".

      --
      Mando

    3. Re:Sex in the Gameplay by drinkypoo · · Score: 2
      This sounds like the ultimate hack. Someone should just get a copy of mortal kombat and recode all the roms for a porn game, then swap someone's board sometime when they're not looking. How hard can it be to break into a video game, anyway?

      Especially in one of the places that locks games with padlocks because there's only like 4-12 keys from each video game manufacturer, and they all use master locks. Those are supposed to be super easy to pick, right?

      Fatalities could be replaced with the big cum shot, the max hardcore-style choke, the donkey punch, and of course, the goatse.cx man. Don't forget to leave out natalie portman in the usual unclothed and rigid state.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Sex in the Gameplay by Bloodmoon1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ah, MacFoxes or something like that. I remember it well. It had a Cheerleader with the Cucumber and a Dominatrix chick that came with such fine devices as a bottle of Jack and a Rocket Pop! You just don't find quality like that anymore. In fact (Did some quick Googling) here it is if you want it for... um... archival/ammusment purposes.

      --

      Request: ECM unit, 1000 km fullerene cable, 1 tactical nuclear weapon. Reason: Birthday party for foreign dignitary.
    5. Re:Sex in the Gameplay by vkevlar · · Score: 1
      There were two, actually. MacFoxes, in color, made with Director and photos of a couple of porn stars based on the earlier MacPlaymate, b&w, but had more costume and sex toy options.

      how do I know this? a priest said it was a good thing to study...

    6. Re:Sex in the Gameplay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you ever bother to do searches or anything?

      Ultra Vixen
      Nymphobot

      <a href=.... fuck it, i'm not your personal google.

  109. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by Stonehand · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...or if you're not up to taking on the opposition physically. For instance, if you live in a relatively wild area, you wouldn't want to have to fend off a hungry cougar with, say, a knife... or a fist, which is about what some countries would let you use.

    And I doubt that, say, a 110# female with a sedentary lifestyle could spar with a pair of 170# thugs with a habit of violent exercise... and your 70-year-old grandmother is probably too slow to even try to run. When it comes to self-defense, without weapons, the fight would generally be extremely uneven. .45 ACP, OTOH, would be quite discouraging to an attacker who lacks a death wish.

    --
    Only the dead have seen the end of war.
  110. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by mrscott · · Score: 1

    "Hi there, Mr. Walmart employee. I'll take a toaster, a microwave, some razors, 'Donald Duck's Christmas movie', new ink for my printer and 'cum-crazed coeds take it in every hole'".

  111. s*x?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SUX? Yes, it certainly does!

  112. More information and screenshots by Newtonian_p · · Score: 3, Informative

    Some screenshots and extra info can be found here:

    http://cube.ign.com/objects/017/017510.html

    --

    There are 2 kinds of people in this world: Those who write in decimal and those who don't

  113. walmart censorship by (startx) · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes walmart sells r-rated movies, but censored. They also sell sensored audio cds. For instance, I made the mistake of buying a Cake cd. CAKE for christ's sake, and it was censored. It doesn't suprise me in the least they'd refuse to sell even a censored version of the game.

  114. Uh oh, the secret is out! by jasonditz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Its only a matter of time until Namco announces Cocksucker Pacman

  115. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, XXX is in the title. Like that movie this summer that has XXX in the title, I mean it was rated XXX, right? Oh, wait. It was rated PG-13.

    Remember something about a book by its cover?

  116. Makes Sense by Josuah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This makes sense because it's relatively easy for a parent to figure out if a movie or magazine is R-rated. They know what to look for and how to judge the content.

    You don't need to worry so much about books which contain adult themes (these stores do not carry erotic stories, but do carry books that may contain sexual or adult content) because anyone who can read those types of books is probably old enough to handle it. Plus reading the book places those adult themes into adult context.

    But when it comes to video and computer games, how often do you hear the kid asking the parent what the game is about? It's entirely the other way around; the parent asks the kid what the game is about. It's entirely plausible that a lot of parents will actually stand there and buy a game like BMX XXX for their 10 year old son and not realize what they are purchasing. I doubt the same is likely to occur for a movie that has XXX in the title let alone a magazine.

  117. It goes like this: by ActiveSX · · Score: 5, Funny

    |
    R |
    e |
    s |
    p |
    e |
    c | Acclaim's somewhere around here
    t | X
    +--------------------
    Free Advertisement

  118. Wal-Mart the ultimate saint? I think not. by default+luser · · Score: 1

    You know, when you offer all three "Porkys" movies for sale at your retail outlets, you really can't hold up your saintly banner all that well.

    Wal-Mart is all about not pissing off parents by carrying this game. But of course there's nothing wrong with hiding this gem on you $9.96 rack. It's all money to Wal-Mart. They just stand to lose lots with a game that provides an all-new low.

    http://www.walmart.com/catalog/search-ng.gsp?sea rc h_constraint=4096&search_query=porkys

    --

    Man is the animal that laughs.
    And occasionally whores for Karma.

  119. Making Love?? by tuelpo · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm not exactly sure that oogling a naked girl on a bike equates to making love. Nor do I ever recall any pimps being equated to eros for helping desperate men find their star-crossed lovers.

    While I'm all for gratuitous nudity, I don't see why this is such an issue, As big as Wal-Mart is it has the same right as any mom-and-pop location;
    to refuse to sell whatever it wants, whenever it wants to.

  120. SegaCD? by signine · · Score: 2, Informative

    I remember there were games for the SegaCD platform which featured full-frontal, and that was back before the SNES. I'm pretty sure that this game isn't, by any means, the first of its kind.

    --
    If there is a God, you are an authorized representative. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr.
  121. Fun free cartoon-tittie games by kaustik · · Score: 1

    While we're talking about titties and games, I of course have to mention the completely free and funny as hell Booty Call games. Almost every house party I have ends up with the remaining 15 survivors crammed into my room playing this shit. Funny.
    Site seems to be down right now, but bookmark it for later.

  122. Wal�Mart's big mistake by goon+america · · Score: 5, Funny
    I don't know about you folks, but I know what I want is a place to buy shotguns, Nirvana albums, nudity-containing video games and R-rated movies. I only want to buy these things at a single location.

    What if a store wanted to sell me a shotgun, a Nirvana album and an R-rated movie, but no nudity-containing video game? Well I'd settle for a few porn magazines. Point is, I need a one-stop-shop, and WalMart ain't got it.

    Please, Walmart, for the decent people out there, give us a place to buy recordings of violent acts, endorsements of violence, instruments of violence and porno. Think of the children.

  123. Lameness filters off......... by F34RL3SS+L34D3R · · Score: 0

    You're New Here Aren't You.....

    I watched a snail, crawl along the edge of a straight razor.

    1. Re:Lameness filters off......... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're new to spelling and grammar, aren't you? WTF is with the comma in your sig? There is absolutely no reason for it to be there. Why all the capital letters? You avoided using a comma in what should be, "You're new here, aren't you?". Buzz off, Troll.

    2. Re:Lameness filters off......... by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      the comma in the sig is to indicate a pause in how it should be read. there doesn't have to be a comma if "you're new here aren't you" is a statement, not a question, like a rhetorical question. buzz off grammar nazi.

  124. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by evilviper · · Score: 2
    then I'll simply spend my money elsewhere.

    No, first you will complain about the fact that they wont sell it, despite the fact that you have little knowledge of the situation (have you played the game or heard from the ESRB?)...
    And then you will claim that you don't care to try an legitimize your point.

    BTW, The Movie 'XXX' is the SINGLE exception that I can ever recall hearing about.
    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  125. Just to add.. by QueenNina · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A) Toys 'R Us is a KID'S store, not marketing to horny teenage males. B) Why isn't this game rated 'Adults Only', seeing as how it contains full nudity? C) Aren't the people who want to play it going to find it even if major retailers don't carry it? I mean, how often do you guys actually go to a real-world store, anyway? And most of them have different content online anyway. If I were heading a major retail chain, I would keep it out of the store to make parents happy, and put it online so that I could actually sell it. Or sell and edited and a regular version. Something tricky like that. :) D) Why aren't there ever naked GUYS in games? Girls play games too, and I know that some of us are straight! :) Not that I would buy a naked-guy game; that's just wrong. ;)

    1. Re:Just to add.. by JohnG · · Score: 2

      I think you answered yourself with the "Not that I would buy a naked-guy game part". Us guys are preverts. For some unknown reason most of us will sit and watch the most inane drivel, like baywatch, just to see a woman in a bikini. As if we couldn't get off of our lazy bums and go so a REAL woman in a bikini at the beach, or the pool. Not to say that women aren't just as sexual, just that they have alot more control and focus over their sexuality than most men do. My other theory is of course, that for the reasons stated above it's much easier for the average woman to get the average REAL guy naked than it is for the average guy to get the average REAL girl naked.

  126. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Christ, it's spelt RIDICULOUS, not how you pronounce it, jackass!

  127. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by SirSlud · · Score: 2

    A double standard is when you apply different values, reasoning or action to one thing.

    I'll make it simple for you. The "one thing" is "what kids and see and watch". The context along which double standards are being applied are: 1) violent content 2) above-the-waist nudity

    Its a double standard because there is a plethora of studies linking aggressive behaviour with what kids see or watch (*note: I do not believe that content creators should have culpability for influcing kids, so this isnt an argument for suing id software for columbine or anything asanine like that), but, as far as I know, there are no studies that I am aware of in which viewing the breasts of women can negatively impact the behaviour of a child/teen. (Note: Studies that are in any way connected to the religious right will be accpeted as soon as somebody turns my glass of water into wine.)

    Thus, when a violent context exists, which reseach suggests (heres what google has to say) is a detrement to a childs development, we allow them access, yet when the context is of anything near sexual nature (we're talking nipples here), we go to great lengths to deny them access. But since you were unable to recognize the instance of the double standard in this scenario, my confidence is low that this post will help your state of confusion.

    (As a related aside, I turned out alright despite watching my aunt breast feed my cousin quite often when I was youngish, but maybe I'm the only child that escaped scenes of nipples in childhood unscaythed. I even saw some playboys when I was 13 .. I'm so glad no other kids ever see those things, or we'd be living in a country chalk full of sexually deviant predators, right?!)

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  128. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by jameslore · · Score: 1

    Incidently, NZ isn't a European nation - we're in the South Pacific, East of Austrailia and no - there's no bridge between Sydney and Auckland.

    Our government is lots of things, possibly even incompetent. But hey, they were democratically elected - which is more than can be said of Bush.

  129. Baby Puritans by skryche · · Score: 1
    How do you think they made little baby Puritans?

    It's not as wacky as it sounds. The Shaker (offshoot of Quaker) religion is a celibate one. They're more puritan than the Puritans!

  130. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by jameslore · · Score: 2, Insightful

    However, if guns are freely available, what are the chances our your thugs not having an excellent selection of their own, as well as being more skilled with them than your sedentary female?

  131. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by Yorrike · · Score: 2
    No, first you will complain about the fact that they wont sell it, despite the fact that you have little knowledge of the situation (have you played the game or heard from the ESRB?)

    Quit bitching. No I haven't played it, but I imagine it'll play like any other Acclaim BMX game. I'm not judging the game, nor am I saying I don't care about the situation. I'm not complaining that they won't sell it, I'm saying their attitude is childish.

    I know plenty about the situation. Wal-Mart are being a bunch of babies. It's just a game.

    Oh, and XXXL shirts are porn shirts. Or so I hear. I also hear that XXX chilli sauce is hugely popular in the porn industry. XXXX is an Australian beer, obviously because XXX isn't enough to portray the vast amount of nudity involved in the brewing process.

    Finally, 24cxxx is an opensource project for programming EPROMs (obviously with library support for pumping out porn).

    Grow up.

    --

    Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?

  132. Perhaps Acclaim should be censored more? by Blind+Linux · · Score: 1

    If we were to block the sale of such truly offensive games as Quarterback Club 2000 DC, perhaps Acclaim would get its' act together and give us decent software!

  133. Wow by Junky191 · · Score: 1

    I am so proud to live in a country that produces such a game. Fuck the dimwits in the military, I am proud of the people who created this wonderful game. *teary eyes* What a wonderful country.

  134. Naked women in magazines by intermodal · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...but it's not like 99.6% of all 15-year old guys haven't already seen a naked woman on video, in a magazine, or (hopefully ;-D) in person.

    and the other .4% have seen it in national geographic and emphatically deny that it counts

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
  135. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  136. Re:Eminem MOD UP!` by racerx509 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I cannot believe that such an untrue post got +5 mod points. Entirely misplaced quote of lyrics, because eminem never has said and probably never will say the "N" word. He has stated many times that he will not because he is white. mod these two up!

    --
    13 year old white supremacists are shitty web designers.
  137. View from an employee by hirebrand · · Score: 5, Interesting
    A Wal-Mart spokesman stated "We're not going to carry any software with any vulgarity or nudity -- we're just not going to do it."
    Ahem.

    I am a Wal Mart electronics associate.

    We carry Fallout (vulgarity, text), Die Hard (vulgarity, audio). We'll be carrying GTA4: Vice city (audio vulgarity ?).

    We carry very violent games.. (PS2) GTA3, (XBOX) Dead to Rights, the new Mortal Kombat game, (PS2) Mark of Kri, (PC) Mafia, etc etc.

    The register prompts whether the customer is 17 when you ring a [M] rated game, or [R] rated movie. I let every parent know what they're buying -- and kids don't get mature games from me. :)

    1. Re:View from an employee by DeathPenguin · · Score: 1

      Bravo on a job well done.

    2. Re:View from an employee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone who works at Wal Mart reading Slashdot? What are the odds?

  138. Platforms? by markalanj · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know what platform with is be on? PC/PS2/XBox? I gotta get this! Killing bad! FUCKING GOOD! Naked Women Good!

    1. Re:Platforms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im guessing Xbox and prolly ps2, mainly coz it looks a hell of a lot like dave mirra...i have no doubt im gonna h'n'c the xbox version.. /me pats acclaim on the back

  139. no such thing as bad publicity by sik+puppy · · Score: 2


    Of course the whole Walmart/Best Buy/etc we won't carry it is the best advertising they could have had. How many people here would never even have heard of the game if not for this arcticle? And how many people will now go out and buy this game that would never have done so otherwise?

    In light of all of this, does anyone want to bet that this idiot(s) in the DC area, when they get caught, will try and blame the whole thing on playing GTA 3 or something similar?

    --
    The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers. Shakespeare, Henry VI, Part 2, Act 4, Scene 2
  140. I hate this kind of marketing drek by marhar · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Acclaim has definitely been following a downward path. They were delisted from NASDAQ and are potentially in danger of being delisted from NASDAQ Small Cap. They just issued an earning warning.

    Now some guys in suits play the "we da bad boyz" card with a well-orchestrated PR blitz, stupid Walmart plays right into their hands, and all the usual comments are made.

    Scott Adams, call your office!

  141. For those of you whining... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...about how "In America, kids watching sex on TV == bad but kids watching violence is OK" really need to learn something about American kids.

    We'd rather have them kill each other than reproduce. It's all part of a master plan.

    "Kill your family, kill the band, then kill yourself. Please make sure you get your WHOLE HEAD in front of the shotgun."

  142. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by evilviper · · Score: 2
    I imagine it'll play like any other Acclaim BMX game.

    That's funny... A short time ago you were almost sure...

    Oh, and XXXL shirts are porn shirts.

    I was refering to Movies (and I suppose games as well), not general products.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  143. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by WWE-TicK · · Score: 1

    Its not unusual for people who legally buy a gun for self defense purposes take lessons on how to use it. I bet your average dumbass criminal is not gonna make the extra effort.

    Furthermore, if guns were not freely available, then I'd say its more likely that a criminal would have a gun than a law abiding, sedentary female.

  144. mmm, I like by user311 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wow, after seeing that trailer, I was cracking up so much I think I woke other people in the house. Jeez, my rebelious side is riled up, and I just want that game now. That is too much fun. Maybe when I feel more moral and inline in the middle of the day I will regret saying this, but damn, I want that movie now.

    It just made me think during watching it. Its human nature to enjoy sex and sensational themes, yet our religious and "civilized" side just wants us to fit in some pure ideal. But the most fun is where we are right now. We are not in sheer puritan minded times, but we havent degraded to utter pathetically primitive attitudes. Were in the balance right now where we can enjoy the advantages of both ends. We arent at either extreme. So enjoy!

    Or maybe Im wrong.....

    1. Re:mmm, I like by happyclam · · Score: 2
      Its human nature to enjoy sex and sensational themes, yet our religious and "civilized" side just wants us to fit in some pure ideal. But the most fun is where we are right now. We are not in sheer puritan minded times, but we havent degraded to utter pathetically primitive attitudes. Were in the balance right now where we can enjoy the advantages of both ends. We arent at either extreme. So enjoy!

      I bet this is what the Romans were saying in the early 500's.

      a bit of history

      --
      He looked at me and said, "Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send your fingerprints off to Washington."
  145. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by evilviper · · Score: 2
    as far as I know, there are no studies that I am aware of in which viewing the breasts of women can negatively impact the behaviour of a child/teen.

    Saying you don't know of any studies that indicate a negative impact, is far different than knowing of a study that indicates that there is NO negative impact.

    Hell, I don't know that nutrinos exist, but not knowing of proof that they do, does not mean the opposite is true.
    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  146. Simple by Bastian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ya know that US stereotype of a cowboy - the guy who carries at least one gun on him at all times, but doesn't even take his clothes off to bathe?

    That's us.

    We still think violence is an excellent way to solve problems, and are largely inured to it - hence the reason why we're one of the last countries in the world to allow captial punishment for mentally retarded individuals.

    Besides, violence raises few anxieties in people that affect them directly. Sex, on the other hand, raises all sorts of issues that Americans never deal with - like our own lack of comfort with our bodies. I still think one of the biggest reasons why there is basically no full-frontal male nudity in movies as opposed to female full-frontal nudity, which is quite common, is related to size issues. I wouldn't be surprised if there are guys out there who have refused to se The Pillow Book because they know they'd have to see Ewan McGregor's big dick.

    Of course, I can't really say this is all that much different from other cultures, since I have never lived anywhere but the USA. Let's hope I'm providing some insight, though - I'd be depressed if this is the way it is around the world.

    1. Re:Simple by hungsolo · · Score: 0
      hence the reason why we're one of the last countries in the world to allow captial punishment for mentally retarded individuals.

      Actually, the Supreme Court just ruled that it is unconstitutional to put mentally retarded individuals to death.

      Yup, the good old State of Texas is the one that wanted to do in the retard.

    2. Re:Simple by Bastian · · Score: 2

      No offense to my many Texan friends, but I kind of want to give Texas back to Mexico.

      Not that they would want to take it. . . no amount of oil and old-recipe Dr. Pepper in the world is worth having to deal with a state that has the kind of culture that produces legislation making it illegal for a man to kiss another man in public.

    3. Re:Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well speaking as a native Texan I have to say that I love this state, but there are a lot of ignorant homophobic people around, and sadly many of them have been elected into state public office, and some of them get to go federal. However, I'd dare say that most Texans don't share those views, or at least I hope they don't.

      Yeah yeah I know offtopic, but I had that Texan instinct to defend my state :-)

    4. Re:Simple by pjp6259 · · Score: 1

      hence the reason why we're one of the last countries in the world to allow captial punishment for mentally retarded individuals.

      We are not one of the last countries in the world to allow capital punishment for mentally retarded individuals, we are just one of the last civilized countries in the world to allow for it.

      --
      Computers don't make mistakes. What they do, they do on purpose.
    5. Re:Simple by Bastian · · Score: 2

      You've got more honor than me. When people insult Illinois, I usually concede, "Yeah, we really are a flat state with terrible weather whose only two claims to fame are the World Church of the Creator and a city that smells like transmission fluid."

    6. Re:Simple by dbretton · · Score: 2

      We still think violence is an excellent way to solve problems, and are largely inured to it - hence the reason why we're one of the last countries in the world to allow captial punishment for mentally retarded individuals.

      That must also be one of the reasons why we have one of the most, if not *the* most, fair judicial systems. Yaknow, "innocent until proven guilty", and all that stuff.
      And guess what? Like it or not, violence is a great way to solve problems. In the grand scheme of things, might makes right.
      History is written by the winners, not the losers. That's why the USA is the United States of America, and not the Nomadic Congregation of Wandering Tribes.
      Hitler was evil, and he is (pretty much) universally perceived as evil. Why? Because he lost. If he conquered the world, he would be some kind of superhero.

      I wouldn't be surprised if there are guys out there who have refused to se The Pillow Book because they know they'd have to see Ewan McGregor's big dick.

      I don't have a problem with my sexuality at all, or my body for that matter.
      However, I still don't wanna stare at "Ewan McGregor's big dick". Does that mean that I have penis envy? Nope. It just means that I don't find staring at a penis to be appealing.
      at all.
      Here's a thought: maybe we don't see so many dicks because that's not what people want to see! Guys don't want to see dicks, girls don't want to see dicks, either. Here's an example:
      1) Guys like titty bars. They like to watch hot chicks dance and GET NAKED.
      2) Girls like male strip clubs. They like to watch hot guys dance and grind up close to them. However, they don't like the package bouncing around in their faces. Usually it's not the thing they really go for. Some women even find the package kind of gross.

  147. There is by Bastian · · Score: 2

    Guys who look at pornography as children are LESS likely to commit sex crimes. MUCH less likely.

    If I remember right, about half of rapists are white men from middle class conservative Christian backgrounds who weren't exposed to sex much as children.

    1. Re:There is by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1
      I know that as a kid I found my dads porn magazines. Strangely enough in the beginning it was just playboys and it went more hardcore and hardcore over the years.
      Now this either means my dad got more perverse, or he damn well knew that I was "using" them.

      Now it's much more relaxed: we just share links of good porn sites.

  148. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by SirSlud · · Score: 2

    yeah but I provided the violence studies, its your job to proove me wrong in the light nudity

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  149. If anyone will correct me this late in the game by user311 · · Score: 1

    Correction noted - just in case anyone gets picky, yes I do know it is a game. Stating movie was an accident.

  150. And you wonder why... by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

    Someone would think they're good to go on a murdering spree?

    Look no further than the dreck media.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  151. poor little johnny by The+Kow · · Score: 3, Funny

    he got sucked in by that vulgar computer game, and next thing we know he's running around his school like a madman.. flashing everyone!

    --
    Moo
  152. Why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really who the hell cares if walmart will sell something walmart sucks...They just have to get over it roll back to reality. There is this new thing called a mall they sell lots of shit

  153. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by achurch · · Score: 4, Informative

    Furthermore, if guns were not freely available, then I'd say its more likely that a criminal would have a gun than a law abiding, sedentary female.

    Here in Japan, guns are illegal. And yet the number of people (outside of gang members) who get shot a year is on the order of 20-25. In the whole country.

    Hmm.

  154. The fact that... by Robber+Baron · · Score: 0, Troll

    John Ashcroft lost an election to a dead guy, should speak volumes about his worth as a leader. I think they shoulda made the dead guy the Attorney General...

    --

    You're using her as bait, Master!

    1. Re:The fact that... by uncoveror · · Score: 2

      Mel Carnahan is still a much livelier guy then John Ashcroft, even though he is dead. It a shame the Nazi brownshirt country-clublican mods consider comments like ours troll. Ridiculing politicians who deserve it is part of democracy. If we called George W. "Der Fuhrer" Bush an American Hero, maybe they would mod us up. Anyway, what's with the nickname, Robber Baron?
      for the mods who are about to pounce on me, Here's a link.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  155. On other related news... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 3, Funny

    Acclaim has amended their previous announcement, stating that because of all the free publicity they got from the furor over their game, they were able to market it enough for it to sell well. Plans for a sequel are to be announced shortly.

  156. GTA 3 is adult themed? by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

    Maybe teenaged themed. I don't think many people over the age of 16 seriously consider a life of crime as a real career. Unless you count my one friend whose sole ambition in life is to work at a job where he can take money from the til everyday. He dropped out of high school for a reason.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  157. this is stupid by 4130BMX_LoCal · · Score: 1

    Retailers are selling games like RTCW, Doom III (when it's out), UT(2003) and a lot of other games that show a lot of violence and the Army is giving away a "how to kill"-manual game. But when it comes to nudity ppl get scared. This is so stupid. Anyway, I'll get the game UNCENSORED..... but nothing beats a good Manual or 180..... in REAL life. Peace, 4130BMX_LoCal

  158. full frontal nudity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you buy an R-rated movie at Wal-Mart, at checkout, a thing pops up to remind the cashier to ask you for ID. So yes, Walmart does sell those movies, but no, they don't sell them to under-17 people. And I challenge you to find movies with full frontal nudity on Walmart's shelves.

    Not only full frontal nudity, but full frontal male nudity. I bought Wildthings at Wal~Mart for $9.99. Executive producer Kevin Bacon decided he wanted everyone to see his bits and pieces close to the end of the movie.

  159. Kids, society, and X-rated material by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

    I kind of wish the whole Victorian sexual hang-up would finish melting away.

    I'd much prefer a world where if the kid runs across some hard core porn, his parents can explain it reasonably and truthfully to him. Why the massive effort and billions of dollars and uncomfortable social situations all blown on trying to keep kids outside of a mass conspiracy?

    There are a few ways, like nudity taboos, in which I'd say that we've actually regressed in pragmatism over the past few thousand years. Even more inexplicable is the covering of the female breasts...where's the point? There are plenty of scieties that managed just fine without covering the breast -- Sumerians, tons of African tribes, peoples around New Zealand.

    The only reasonable arguments I can think of against the open discussion of sex and unrestricted nudity are that

    A) It affords society a greater degree of contrast in body language in expressing desire to have sex.
    B) Potentially reduces sexual promiscuity, which might help reduce STDs. Not sure about this one way or the other.
    C) (Probably the biggie) Parents feel that they can keep kids from having sex by keeping them in the dark about it.
    D) Possibly advantageous to our (in historical terms) very old populace. There's more a clothed person can do to appear young and sexually appealing than an entirely nude person can do. Just a guess.

    I'd like a child to be able to read "adult" content and be able to deal with it just as responsibly as they're generally allowed to do with, say, comic books, or novels.

    If you really have a burning desire to try to shape a child's psyche, I strongly feel that you're better off with positive encouragement ("wow, those are some really nice photographs you've taken...can I look through them?" or "Next chess game, I'll teach you another opening that I like to use sometimes") than by trying to restrict information from them.

    Just my two cents.

  160. I'll take a stab at this (no pun intended) by Flat5 · · Score: 1

    Sex is something that a lot of people think deserves a lot of respect. Why do they think that? One reason might be that sex leads to children, sometimes whether you like it or not, and bringing children into this world is about as serious as a life decision as there is. Life is hard enough; the conditions for kids ought to be as right as you know how to make it. That part is pretty reasonable, in my opinion.

    So an attempt is made to bestow a great deal of respect and importance on sex. So it becomes sort of like money - it's gauche to talk about it. Part of making a big deal of it is not treating it as an everyday subject, because that cheapens it and deadens people to the respect it deserves.

    The only problem with that is it doesn't seem to work very well. Mystifying it has the forbidden fruit effect, etc. You know the drill.

    Anyway, I think that's in large part why sex tends to be hush-hush in our culture.

    Flat5

  161. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup, no US presidents are. That's the price we pay for the electoral college.

  162. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by Nept · · Score: 2

    (1) the populace in the US is not armed to the teeth.
    (2) Nudity is immoral. But why do you feel owning a gun is?
    Actually, I believe many europeans would invert that last statement. Just a cultural difference.

    --
    "Teachers leave us kids alone ..." - Roger Waters, Pink Floyd
  163. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. HA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hahaha

    You think you are not under a oppressive government! THe US may have many liberial laws but the powers of law enforcement agencies have been increasing. Police in the US have much greater powers for random search than european ones. I also fear the powerful military in the US which has the potential to dominate US politics and run their own agenda. The US should also be careful of building excessive military as beyond a certain point it will bring down the nation

  164. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by wd123 · · Score: 2

    XXX is in the damn title!

    Kind of like that crappy Vin Diesel movie which, afaik, was not about hardcore sex but about selling Mr. Fast and Furious to anyone stupid enough to pay $8 to see him in another movie?

    Come on. 'XXX' in a title or phrase doesn't prove it's intended to be all about hardcore sex.

    --
    "question = (to) ? be : !be;" --Shakespeare
  165. GIGGEDY GIGGEDY GIGGEDY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heh heh ooooh riiight. /end shameless family guy quotes.

  166. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

    And you really think that, with guns being available evrywhere, those criminals wouldn't have guns themselves?

    And what's up with that first sentence? You think that 'the general populace', even armed with whatever assault cannon available, will be able to stand even for a second against an armed and trained military? If you're up against a hugely overwhelming force, you picked the wrong fight. Or at least picked the wrong place/method.

    --
    -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
  167. So... by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

    ...after all this complaing, I haven't seen one post about the actual gameplay of the game. Lotsa 'I will/won't buy this', but maybe the game play of this game is the bees knees. In which case, I'm getting it, nekkid poodles and whores aside.

    --
    -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
  168. Desperate attempt by Acclaim... by DeathPenguin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...to regain their reputation as a company pushing the envelope in video game vulgarity. Remember how big of a hit Mortal Kombat was when it first came out? Pure shock value. Acclaim made a killing off it, as well as MK2, and even made a movie out of it the video game.

    Since then we've had countless other fighting games, some of which were purely copycat games, others which introduced new technology such as 3D arenas, which Acclaim hasn't really been keeping up with. Now that gore fest fighting games are no longer so offensive, perhaps even tame compared to gore fest shooters like Quake 3 and Unreal Tournament, they decide to make money off the next most provocative cultural taboo--Sex.

    What's next? A game about wife beaters? Kids who set fire to animals? No, I'm not some paranoid Rosie 'O Donnel wannabe, and I'm glad id won their lawsuit against those neglegent deadbeat Columbine parents, but there is a point when it just becomes painfully obvious that some in the entertainment business are out to take advantage of stupid kids with too much money by offering them the forbidden fruit in a medium their parents are likely very ill-informed about.

  169. UT Porn Mod (was: Re:Sex in the Gameplay) by Qbertino · · Score: 2

    I've actually thought of some UT Porn mod allready.
    Those Girls (and probably a guy or 2) in UT are half undedressed sex symbols anyway - it would only be consequent.

    You don't die and respawn, you go off and respawn.

    The Redeemer would be an "osgasm bomb", the RL shoots dildos (bad news if you've got a male character :-) ), the Bio Rifle a massage oil gun (you don't die, you slip), the Flak would shoot bunches of condoms. Armor would be special sets of lingerie and when losing hits one wouldn't yell and bleed but moan and gasp and spill, well, y'know, other body fluids. Characters with quad damage would have enlargend boobs or dicks (or both? LOL). And so on...

    It shouldn't be that difficult to programm and skin and it shure would be cool and a great laugh.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:UT Porn Mod (was: Re:Sex in the Gameplay) by swordgeek · · Score: 2

      I hate to be a stick in the mud, but...

      bah.

      It's the same thing. Ever played Nerf Arena? You have nerf guns and shoot different types of foam darts. It's entirely different from UT where you blow people up, and yet...

      It's a FPS. Your mod would still be a FPS, regardless of what you're shooting. (blanks? :-> ) Yeah, it'd definitely be fun and I'd download it, but it's just a FPS mod.

      The original poster's idea was interesting--actually have a game that's based on sex. There were a few for a while, but they went nowhere.

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  170. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nudity is immoral

    You, sir, must be a troll.
    If you are not, then I truly, deeply feel sorry for you.

  171. I DONT GET IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why the FUCK is nudity rated worse than violence, can someone PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT!?

    1. Re:I DONT GET IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      One needs only compare the difference in maturity level regarding sex between an 18 year old who grew up in Europe to one who grew up here to see that our nations prudity is a problem.

  172. But do they sell by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

    trenchcoats to complete the image?

  173. slashdot grammar by bythescruff · · Score: 1

    Prostitutes and pimps and main characters, oh my!

    Prostitutes and pimps and main characters, oh my!

    --
    Chuck Norris: Socialism == a thousand years of darkness.
  174. More Sex is actually safer sex by Chalex · · Score: 1

    Here's a chapter from an upcoming book by my current economics professor:
    More Sex is Safer Sex

  175. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by dinotrac · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why do I get the feeling you don't have kids?

    I know many parents (my wife and I included) who work very hard at raising their children responsibly. Many of them forego income so that a parent can remain home with the children and many of those home-school because of deficiencies in our local public schools.

    Trouble is, no matter how responsible you try to be, each of us is only human. Each of us gets tired, has off-days, etc. Even at our best, we have only two eyes, two ears, etc.

    In the (not so) old days, people watched out for their neighbors' children, not just their own. That doesn't happen so much any more, at a time when parenting is harder than ever.

    I greatly appreciate that Wal-Mart makes the job just a little bit easier.

  176. What the Puritans have done for religion. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, no, no. Sex is the most highly valued thing in all Christian religions. The family (that is, mommy and daddy having sex and creating little junior) is the base of most right-wing churches, and most of the left wing ones too.

    The whole marriage thing is a social contract for the male to support its offspring, as it has an innate desire not to.

  177. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "it wouldn't matter if hard-core pornography was shelved next to Barney cartoons"

    Have you ever visited Denmark ;-)

  178. OT: Your sig by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 0

    Seems some suckers really think you will introduce them to your sister because you got a +1 Informative. If anything, your post is Redundant (I hate that moderation, it shouldn't exist, nor should Underrated and Overrated).
    Hope your sister is at least a bit cute for these screwed-up-moderators.

  179. lotsa nudity --- what a turn off? by goyena · · Score: 1

    I'm American and I moved to Germany five years ago. It's difficult perhaps for an American to imagine, but lotsa of nudity actually becomes a major turn-off, which usually has the added result of "tame" pornography and nudity not being such a big deal. Here, as in England, daily newspapers (also bought by women!) carry a naked women on the cover page every day (www.bild.de), and nudity can be seen everywhere. This is mostly because I get the impression that Germans are very comfortable with their bodies and nudity. Just look in the sauna here to see all the naked sweating bodies - it's not very erotic though.

    Nevertheless, the effects of banalizing pornography (which I wouldn't label BMX XXX as being, so perhaps this is off-topic) seems to be coming to light, and the results can be disturbing, especially since, pornography, in order to sell more, has had to concentrate on more extreme aspects (fisting, rape, gangbangs, etc.)...which eventually, due to their wide availability, become "accepted".

    Adolescents have access to this material, whatever the laws and legal ages (in any country, for that matter) and, consciously or unconsciously, use this material as sex education. It's easy to imagine how vicious teen sex could become if the majority of young boys think that ALL girls have a rape fantasy and take a "no" for a sign of excitation.

    1. Re:lotsa nudity --- what a turn off? by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
      Here, as in England, daily newspapers carry a naked women on the cover page every day

      Not quite. The ones on the cover have the naughty bits covered up with bikinis etc. You have to buy the newspaper to get to see the whole traditional "page 3 girl".

      But, at least these newspapers are 100% honest about what they stand for. The ones I can't abide are the similar ones (minus nudity) aimed at the same brain-dead market, that actually pretend to be a reputable publication. With the tits & arse papers you know where you stand. ;-)

    2. Re:lotsa nudity --- what a turn off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Adolescents have access to this material, whatever the laws and legal ages (in any country, for that matter) and, consciously or unconsciously, use this material as sex education. It's easy to imagine how vicious teen sex could become if the majority of young boys think that ALL girls have a rape fantasy and take a "no" for a sign of excitation.

      It may be "easy to imagine", but it's just a fallacy of logic. Just because something seems plausable doesn't make it so.

      First, you've just made a great argument for why schools should have honest and open sexual education.

      Second, kids are not stupid; they have the uncanny ability to distinguish real from fantasy (unlike many adults I know). Actual violence (sexual or otherwise) begets actual violence. Fantasy violence begets ... well ... an overactive imagination, but little else. The people who commit violent acts commit them not because they played violent video games or watched violent TV growing up, but because they were subjected to or witnessed actual acts of violent growing up. Its a psychological cycle.

      TV, video games, pornography, etc. are all easy places to place the blame. In reality, though, the places to place the blame are far harder to face up to -- abusive or sexually abusive homes, inner cities where violence is the norm, etc.

  180. thrill of hunting by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 2
    From what I understand, from friends who hunt, and it's how I would feel, the thrill of hunting for lots of people is in finding and killing your own food yourself, ie. directly taking part in the circle of life. Personally, I abhor the killing of any animal without just cause, such as protecting crops, protecting your home, or for food.

    Then there are people who kill for "sport"... I just can't understand that, seems pretty sick to me.

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
  181. Ummm.... yeah. by artemis67 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How many billions of dollars in sales does Wal-Mart do each year? If you honestly think they are staying up late at night because of the missed revenue for a single video game title, you are sadly mistaken.

    And frankly, there are larger marketing issues here which I'm sure you can't appreciate. Wal-Mart has spent a lot of money to cultivate a family-friendly image. A BMX game that overtly promotes sexuality would cost more to repair the PR damage than the revenue it would generate.

  182. Riiight by billcopc · · Score: 1

    "Best Buy has stated it will sell a censored version of the game"

    Now there's something just wrong with this. If I were making a game and I had spent months tuning it and making it just right, and some bigass retail chain comes along and tells me I have to change it, I'd stab that idiot rep with a stick of RAM! Acclaim is making the game, they've been making them for well over a decade, they know what they're doing. Sure, Best Buy has a lot of buying power, and they might think they have a word in this, but really it's not their product and its none of their business. If they don't want to sell sex and violence, then they can pull out just about every damn DVD from their shelves and stick with mind-numbing Disney titles. But to tell the GAME DEVELOPERS which way to develop THEIR game ? That's downright preposterous.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Riiight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'd stab that idiot rep with a stick of RAM"

      This is now my new favorite quote.

  183. The final level would be... by gosand · · Score: 1
    When you get to the end, your final opponent is ....

    Rosie O'Donnell

    Ackkkk! Definitely one game that would be hard to finish. Wouldn't want to brag about winning, or losing.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  184. It doesn't matter anyway by darianx · · Score: 0

    Whether Wallyworld and ToysArentUs sell this game or not, it will probably be a big seller anyway. Anything that generates large amounts of controversy usually sells pretty well. Look at 2 Live Crew and that album that was banned everywhere and had music stores demanding ID upon purchase. That thing sold how many million copies?

    I think most of the so-called media are missing the point with this game anyway. It was, at one time, called "Dave Mirra's BMX XXX" until Mirra decided not to lend his name. That tells me there is a solid game behind all the lowbrow humor in there. They hired comedy writers to write the dialogue...all the humor is basically Howard Stern type humor. Howard's demographic is the one that will be buying this game anyway...the funny stuff will be lost on the kiddies.

    I've seen several mentions of the nudity involved and how that in Europe it isn't a big deal. They are right..the bare body in America is seen as something terrible and horrifying but yet other things are given a pass. I think everyone needs to lighten up on games anyway. If parents would boot some ass when the kid gets out of line, they wouldn't have to worry about Susie whacking her classmates.

    1. Re:It doesn't matter anyway by techwolf · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've seen full frontal on TV commercials in Europe. It's really no big deal.

      If parents didn't have to worry about being thrown in jail for abusing their children because they gave them a spanking...

      In any case, what difference does it make if Big Retailer doesn't carry it? You can still buy it, and people will. If WalMart doesn't want my money, that's fine. I'll give it to someone else who does (and is less of a hypocrite).

      --
      I don't do this for karma, I do it for cash. It's much better.
  185. What??? by rmezzari · · Score: 0

    No screenshots???

    --
    "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds !"
  186. Re:we could NOT care less, dammit ! by ahaning · · Score: 1

    Thank you for saying what I was going to say so I don't have to say it.

    BTW. They say "could care less" :-).

    Now, how about "The [noun] was all but [verb]." ? As in: "The town was all but flooded." ... So... the town was on fire, icey, and dry... it wasn't flooded? Huh?

    --
    Withdrawal before climax is very ineffective and those who try this are usually called "parents."
  187. Check out this screenshot by RedWolves2 · · Score: 2, Funny
  188. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by benzapp · · Score: 1

    Yeah, and you are all free. Living in your box homes, with outrageous inflation, unemployment, and the most expensive living conditions on the planet.

    Maybe if you people had guns you could actually rebel against the unbelieveably corrupt government that rules Japan.

    Maybe the Inu minorities in the north could actually have their native lands back against increasing encroachment from the south.

    Maybe the japanese people will actually be able to afford as much sushi as we get in the USA.

    Japan is a gigantic prison, with a system of government and society that turns its people into slaves. Of COURSE they don't want guns. How will they make a nice Nissan for the Americans if they can do whatever they want?

    --
    I don't read or respond to AC posts
  189. not a shock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    walmart censors the music and movies it carries, and will not carry a movie with nudity, so why is it shocking that it wont carry this game?

  190. The Man Show has covered this already by bee · · Score: 1

    On one show, Adam Carolla stated that if he had a kid, he'd let him see his penis exactly once, so the kid would grow up thinking his dad has the biggest penis in the world.

    --
    At least mafia-owned pizzarias make excellent pizza. Compare to Bill Gates.
  191. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by AsparagusChallenge · · Score: 1

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember having read that in Japan there's a police cabin every two or three streets.

  192. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by WWE-TicK · · Score: 1

    > Here in Japan, guns are illegal.

    However, in the UK where guns are also illegal homicide rates remain steady while in the US homicide rates are actually on the decline.

    Speaking of the UK, there was case involving a man who used a shotgun and killed a burglar who broke into his house while he was sleeping. The man is now serving a life sentence for first degree murder.

    > Hmm.

    Hmm, indeed.

  193. Just some info taken from "Bowling for Columbine" by afxgrin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" website:

    On August 27, 1999 Bryan Midgette was arrested for abusing his wife, Marsha. Despite a restraining order, Bryan tracked Marsha down three days later at the Wal-Mart in Pottstown, Pennsylvania where she worked. He purchased bullets for his .22 caliber handgun in the store, then chased Marsha through the aisles and shot her before killing himself. Marsha survived, but suffers from severe brain damage.

    For ten years, James Easton Kelly had studied towards a graduate degree in English at the University of Arkansas. Then, his professor, John R. Locke, informed him that due to his lack of progress towards his doctorate, the school was dismissing him. At 11:27 AM on Monday, August 28th, 2000 Kelly went to a Wal-Mart 10 miles from the Fayetteville campus and purchased 50 rounds of .38 caliber bullets. He then returned to the school, went to Locke's office and, shortly after noon, shot Locke three times, killing him instantly. Kelly then turned the gun on himself.

    On May 22, 2001 Laura Gassaway entered a Wal-Mart in Rockford, Illinois, went to the sporting goods section and tried to purchase bullets for her handgun. After the clerk refused to sell to her because she did not have a state firearm owners identification card, Gassaway began shoplifting other items before store security stopped her. The security officers called the police and then took Gassaway to the back of the store. There, she pulled a handgun from her purse and shot three security guards before police burst in and killed her.

    During an argument with his estranged wife on July 31, 2001, John VanGraafeiland threatened to go to Wal-Mart, buy bullets and kill himself. Police contacted the two local Wal-Mart's in Wilmington, North Carolina, warning them not to sell bullets to the man, but no one told the clerk selling the ammunition. After purchasing the bullets, VanGraafeiland went to his car and killed himself. Wal-Mart eventually settled a lawsuit brought by his family, paying them $130,000 for their negligence.

  194. If I can't buy a naked BMX game... by BigJimSlade · · Score: 2

    THE TERRORISTS HAVE WON!

  195. Irony by DaytonCIM · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A Wal-Mart spokesman stated "We're not going to carry any software with any vulgarity or nudity -- we're just not going to do it."

    From AP: Wal-Mart, the nation's largest retailer, is refusing to carry Sheryl Crow's upcoming album, because one song says the chain sells guns to kids.

    In both cases Wal Mart seems to be simply protecting its most profitable sales: GUNS. We all know video games and good music detract from gun sales. And certainly, kids would want to buy a video game with naked chicks over a new rifle.

    And can we blame Wal Mart? After Congressman Pat Kennedy "motivated" Wal Mart to move Guns away from the toy department in 2001 (effectively destroying the under 18 sales market) and with cigarette sales at an all-time low, Wal Mart must protect its last REAL AMERICAN profitable sales area: GUNS.

    1. Re:Irony by Garridan · · Score: 1

      Uh, whats wrong with selling guns? Posession of firearms is our constitutional right. Wal-Mart sells guns for hunting and personal protection. I'm happy to find guns available where they still can be. They have a valid purpose. Pornography, though, is understandably considered vulgar.

      But in all honesty, I'd probably play the game long before going to Wal-Mart for a gun. (hell, I'm downloading it off Kazaa right now) I mean, jesus... everything else in the store is shit; how could I trust my life to a gun from there?

  196. Death == good, Boobies == bad by supabeast! · · Score: 4, Funny

    So Wal-Mart will glady sell me a pump shotgun, ammo, and a bandoleer strap, everything needed for a killing spree, but they won't sell me a video game with titties in it?

    Christian America has some very, very fucked up priorities.

  197. first cheat released! by hatrisc · · Score: 0

    Full clothes on: triangle, square, circle, x,x,x start, select, up, down , left , right , start

    --
    I write code.
  198. Same old Acclaim by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1


    Acclaim has always done business by taking a popular license or provocative concept and then releasing a shitty game built around it.

    I'd refuse to sell such a lame game too if I were Wal-Mart.

  199. Hypocricy, stated well in post by TerraFORM · · Score: 1

    surely if that's WM's stance, i.e., 'we don't sell nudity and vulgarity' then, indeed, they should remove all of their R-rated titles in which there is some skin. At least there's no question what 'nudity' is. When you consider other, variably-defined terms such as 'vulgarity,' you enter a very gray area. One person's vulgarity is another's cup of tea. Let the public make their own choices.

  200. Pornographic Office by Snafoo · · Score: 2

    . o O ( Just wait till they find the 'Clippy gets a BJ' easter egg in Office XP )

    --
    - undoware.ca
  201. Re:Walmart sells R rated movies, but not X rated by Danse · · Score: 2

    No problem. You point to the sign that says you don't sell NC17 or whatever games to anyone under 18. Just like they have posted signs about cigarettes and alcohol.

    --
    It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  202. Sit back and Ponder by alamaric · · Score: 1

    You know I find it truely amazing this country of ours... United States of america. We have parents, people and stores always trying to make them selves the good guys. Reguardless of what the game is because personally I cold care less, Let me just ask one simple question, What kind of world do we live in when parents buy games, rent/buy movies, buy toys that show, have, or its sole purpose is to blow a whole in someone's chest and would rather not warrent thier kids to see someone's chest? Because walmart, toysRus and Kaybee all are "family stores", where the "family" (Which is another subject I will not get into with the divorce rate, single parents, etc..), can come in and feel like a second home. This is supposidly what the parents want and the sheltered people in our society crave fro thier children. Store owners and CEO's of the big three are not stupid and also realize that by saying they will not carry it will make those "sheltering parents" will bring those patrons into the store. They also realize that the people who so disire the game will go someoplace else and not even think twice about running inot one of those stores later on. Now, in a world today that is so dam politically correct its annoying and where most, not all, can not even except responsibilitiy for thier own actions, we are getting a little ridiculous. I mean, for heaven sake, peopel now sueing fast food resturaunts for getting fat eating thier food. Well no kidding really, first of all they did not shove that food down your throat and second, you have to be a complete idiot to not be aware that they use the cheapest stuff and cook it in grease! (everything is good in moderations) Now, viloence is condoned but having sex is not! Are we a war mongling species or what, folks. First of all, I think the naked body is one of the most beautiful things in the world. There is millions of years of evolution at work here. Your body is the best tool you will ever own. Name something else that can accomplish the same tasks. The answer is Nothing! Sex is also a beautiful thing. Now I am not religious and yes I have had more partners than some porn stars, however I take the necessary percautions. My parents left those "forbidden" magizines, all around the house along with allowing me to help myself with the liquor cabinet. Now witht hat in mind and for you small minded fools who think I turned out wrong, I got nothing but great marks in school and in college, and yes I did finish college unlike the majority of our kids today. I graduated with a computer science degree, I am in shape, excersise daily, and make 6 figures a year. I think I turned out okay and my parents also think the same. Now what does my long drawn out story have to do ith the tea in china. Its this simple, if you do not like, do not buy it, do not picket your ass in the font fo the store saying you will not buy the item. who cares, all the labels on the package are indicated for you so that will tell you if you believe it is appropriate. When I went to college, I meet this kid who was in my suite that was 20 years old. He could not do aything without mommy or daddy. He did not know what was going on the world, how the world operated or anything.. Basicaly he could not function outside his microcasim and his parents sheltered him. Wehn we took him to the grocery store one day he started to cry almost becaue we all split up and went shopping for our own stuff and agreed to meet back in 15 minutes. He did not even know how to do that. Now is that the type of kids you want to raise. people who can not think! Bottom line is big business dicates what the consumer does, so GROW UP! Prove to them you can care less what you carry. Now I am also not saying that chuckie cheese should have a porno mag rack either! I am just saying be real, who cares what the content of the game is, walmart elcetronics is in the buisiness of supplying software to people, supply it, you donot like it, donot buy the dam things for your kids. Its not like they are gonna paste nudy pictures all over it! Jyust what kind of place do we live in where violence is better than nudity. The day, walmart takes thier guns out of thier sporting goods section, and toysRus, kay be and walmart again, remove thier toy squirt guns and cap guns out of toys is the day I truely belive they do something for thier beliefs rather than thier wallets and make the small minded american public think they are a good company. Now mind you I am not calling everyone small minded, just the idiots that are and can not connect the dots.

  203. Atheists can be moral by anomaly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It was not my intention to suggest that atheists are immoral. I'm sorry that what I wrote sounded like that to you. What I meant to communicate is largely in agreement with what you wrote above - that absent the existence of an objective standard it comes down to the individual's conscience.

    However, when you make that statement, you do two things:
    1) You are stating a moral absolute. (That no absolute exists.)
    2) You are saying that your opinion has more or less merit than someone else's. This too, requires a moral judgment dependent on some sort of moral standard.

    The DC sniper, and Al Queda terrorists are probably acting within the guidelines of their conscience - as do I, and as you suggest above - as do you.

    The fact that we claim to have a standard does not address the validity of that standard. I'm pretty sure that the DC sniper and Al Queda are in violation of what your conscience and mine would agree is reprehensible. The question to answer is why would you and I agree?

    WRT the existence of God:
    When one asserts that there is no God, by the nature of that statement (assertion of a logical negative) one must in one instant have all knowledge of all that exists.

    Otherwise would it not be possible for the thing that is asserted not to exist - simply exist in a portion of the universe about which the person making the assertion is not knowledgeable?

    In short - to authoritatively assert that no god exists requires that one posess attributes that only god could have. I belive that this refutes the premise.

    This leaves us with the concept that God may or may not exist, and we need to determine whether we belive that He does or does not. This depends on evidence and our interpretation of it.

    WRT the provability of the existence of God - I'm curious...what evidence would be sufficient to convince you?

    Respectfully,
    Anomaly

    --
    But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    1. Re:Atheists can be moral by 2short · · Score: 1

      I don't feel I need complete knowledge of everything to assert that god does not exist, just as I do not need complete knowledge of of all parralel lines to assert that none of them meet. Quite simply, I do not believe god is possible. Obviously it matters a lot how you define the word "god". I'm assuming your definition includes the concept of omnipotence, which is sufficient for me, because I find omnipotence to be an inherently ridiculous concept. The classic "Can God create a rock he cannot lift?". So with respect to convincing me of the existence of God: 1) first define "God"; 2) then convince me a being that fits that definition even could exist. 3) Then you can try to convince me that beings existence is probable.

      As to how you, I, or the DC sniper can prove our moral standard is valid: we can't. I am willing to act upon my moral standard anyway, as presumably are the collective citizenry of the DC area via law enforcement. I disagree with your assertion that I am claiming my opinion has more or less merit than someone elses. The DC snipers opinion on morals is as valid as mine, but that wouldn't slow me down a bit if I had the oportunity to stop him. I've found that when I think something is really beyond-the-pale immorral, most others aggree with me. On the other hand a lot of people seem to find a lot of things immoral that I do not. These people tend to be religious, and they tend to want me to conform to their moral standard.

    2. Re:Atheists can be moral by anomaly · · Score: 2

      I'll write more in a bit, but my first visceral reaction to this:

      a lot of people seem to find a lot of things immoral that I do not. These people tend to be religious, and they tend to want me to conform to their moral standard.

      Is that it sounds to me like you are saying that you would like it very much if those religious types would conform to your moral standard - which says that there are no absolutes! :-)

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    3. Re:Atheists can be moral by 2short · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't think that's what I'm saying. I would like for them to not expect me to conform to every detail of their moral code, just as I do not expect them to conform to every detail of mine. I do want them to conform to the parts I consider non-negotiable (e.g. killing of innocents is wrong).

      I don't think "there are no absolutes" is an accurate description of my moral code. The part of my comments that you seem to be translating thus I would phrase as "there no one moral code that is independent of a particular individual".

      Within my own moral code there are many absolutes. For example: "Killing people for no reason is wrong" and "Any action which does no harm to others cannot be wrong". The latter is where I tend to get really annoyed at others who disagree and want me to comply to their code.

    4. Re:Atheists can be moral by anomaly · · Score: 2

      I want you to know that in my response below I mean you no disrespect personally. I do have some serious issues with your logic.

      How can you say that it is not possible to prove that our standard is valid?

      Saying that is making a moral judgement, and establishing the very absolute that you are decreeing impossible. In philosophical terms, this is known as "self-referentially incoherent."

      Furthermore, suggesting that God should be able to create a rock that He cannot lift is like asking me to describe the aroma of the color "9" - it's nonsense. It's also similar to asking how much electricity loves someone. Utter nonsense.

      Define God - that is a HUGE question. I'll describe some of His attributes.
      1) Omnipotence - Complete power to do anything consistent with His Character

      2) Omniscience - complete knowledge of all things simultaneously

      3) Omnipresence - everywhere present in totality at the same time.

      4) Mercy - compassion or forbearance shown especially to an offender or to one subject to one's power

      5) Grace - unmerited divine assistance given humans - God doesn't give us what we deserve.

      The very fact that God (who is holy, pure, and perfect) allows any of us (who are unholy, imperfect, and impure) to continue to exist is a powerful example of His character.

      Regards,
      Anomaly
      BTW - I do not "want you to conform to my moral standard." I am willing to share with you the goodness that I have experienced as a result of my relationship with Jesus Christ, and also to communicate to you what I sincerely believe that God says about those people who reject Him. Whether you conform to that standard or not is simply your decision.

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    5. Re:Atheists can be moral by anomaly · · Score: 2

      It has been said that "it is not reasonable to judge a philosophy by those who abuse it - rather judge a philosophy by those adherents who faithfully hold to the teachings of their philosophy and see what the logical outcome is."

      Killing of innocents is wrong - why? Doesn't it make sense that if there are no absolutes (transcending all individuals) that the logical conclusion is that might makes right?

      So why shouldn't I kill innocents if I want to do it? If I can be more powerful than you, and others who think like you, why shouldn't I wipe you out?

      It seems to me that if I am accountable only to other humans for the things that I do the logical conclusion is that I should expect to have extremely great lattitude in my lifestyle and choices.

      Respectfully,
      Anomaly

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
  204. This is satire, is ist ? by frost22 · · Score: 2

    Folks, this article is satirical, is'n it ? It just has to. I mean, I know good satire when I see it, and this one just so fucking good, it's hilarious.

    Actually it would be a total waste this not to be satirical.

    Now, someone please tell me....

    --
    ...and here I stand, with all my lore, poor fool, no wiser than before.
  205. umm, Wal-Mart sells Final Fantasy, right? by jhealen · · Score: 1

    just an FYI: FF8 - There's alot of foul mouthed characters in that. FF10 - Half the female characters are in thongs. And Shiva has never had a full outfit in any version.

  206. A Game Developer's Perspective. by plagioclase · · Score: 1
    This quote is from an article titled "Stop Calling Games Addictive" by Ernest Adams.
    "I don't think there can be any doubt that the game industry has very good aim. No, I'll go farther than that. It's an expert marksman, a crack shot.

    As least, so long as what it's aiming at is its own foot.

    ..small groups of individuals shoot the rest of us in the foot for the sake of a quick buck. Kingpin, Postal!, Carmageddon, Grand Theft Auto 3, State of Emergency; there's always someone who's prepared to ratchet down the taste threshold to a new low without any regard for what it does to the rest of the industry. It's especially unfortunate in the case of Grand Theft Auto 3, where an unusually well-crafted game has been used to propagate racist stereotypes and celebrate sexual exploitation. The consequences for children or society as a whole are as yet uncertain, but the consequences for us -- game developers -- are pretty clear. When I'm introduced to someone at a cocktail party as a computer game designer, and they stiffen and turn away, it's not my own games they're reacting to. So kind of my colleagues to provide the tar that smears me."
    --
    Yeah, I have a webcomic...
  207. just so you are clear on this.... by bdavenport · · Score: 2

    although the news media covering the sniper attacks in the DC/Metro area love showing AR-15s and other "assualt" rifle-looking weapons which fire .223 calibur bullets....

    i deer hunt and i use a .223 and it looks like a regular rifle; it features bolt action and you can buy one just like it at Wally World. in rural TX you see many pick-ups with these hanging in their windows.

    just b/c you can use a weapon for gathering food, doesn't excluded the fact that you can use a weapon for harm. Wally World sells weapons. end of discussion.

    it's not the gun, it's the person.

    --
    /* Half alive and half dead too, work is for suckers and the sucker is you. - "Half-life" by Local H*/
  208. reliability of survey data by anomaly · · Score: 2

    I have heard about this survey from sources that I consider to be reliable, and had not done a comprehensive search for the raw data. At this point the best information I can find about the research is in the endnotes in this article:
    http://www.palmettofamily.org/Reports/Ma rriage/HTM LRpt/marr01.htm

    1 Robert T. Michael, et. al., Sex in America: A Definitive Survey (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1994), p. 1, 131.
    2 Edward O. Laumann, et. al., The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), p. 364, table 10.5.

    I'm fairly certain that the local library can get the raw data on which the article was based.

    Hope this helps!

    Regards,
    Anomaly

    --
    But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
  209. Perhaps a little late? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's nothing a a game can teach me that a movie or a book or walking around on the street hasn't taught me already.
    Personally, I've wanted games to become a little more adult oriented for a while. I'm an adult, sure I enjoy a game when it's fun to play. It's just that sometimes you're in the mood for something a little more... and there really isn't anything.
    I don't know that I'll ever play this game, not really my type of game or anything, it's just that I think that this sort of thing doesn't really hurt anybody.
    Honestly, anybody who thinks that their mind was warped by a game hes let themselves be warped by that game.
    I see worse *crap* on the TV.
    Yes yes, I know I'm an Anonymous Coward, heh... never got around to registering ^_^
    Anyways, personally I would really like to see more variety out there in the game world, I'm sick and tired of the type of game where you run around killing things over and over and over... (YGMP)
    Of course as we all have our rights, it's alright for Wal-Mart to choose not to sell this game, all the better to'm. I never shop there anyway ^_^

    On a side-note, I would like to see that kernel with adult oriented content =D

    That's enough from the Anonymous Coward, thanks for readin' my post!

  210. The action is ok the publicity rude by Felinoid · · Score: 1

    Stores silently refuse to sell items every day.
    Lesure Suit Larry never made it to Toys r us, Wards or other department stores with a Computer games department.
    It did make it to Eggheads and Fantacy Plaza.
    Early erotica games never saw store shelfs and one apple ][ graphics demo was pulled.
    The actions were quiet as if mundain everyday choices.
    But for this game the retaillers announced it like this was some glorious act of moral outrage.

    They can make choices like this all day long. But remember that now you've just told software makers to leave you out of any plans they have.
    Microsoft should exclude them from new software release partys. Rebates etc.. any premotional that requires store participation should be not be tried with thies retaillers.

    Don't make a public spectical of a personal objection.
    Ever... You may find your suppliers objectting to your lack of tact next time you want to restock.

    --
    I don't actually exist.
  211. -1, Troll by achurch · · Score: 1

    I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but . . .

    Yeah, and you are all free. Living in your box homes,

    Some of us don't need 15-room mansions to live comfortably.

    with outrageous inflation,

    Of right around zero, at most. (Or have you missed all the news on how Japan is teetering on the brink of deflation?)

    unemployment,

    5.4% in August. By comparison, the US was at 5.7% in the same period.

    Maybe if you people had guns you could actually rebel against the unbelieveably corrupt government that rules Japan.

    Pot, kettle . . .

  212. Police boxes by achurch · · Score: 2

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember having read that in Japan there's a police cabin every two or three streets.

    There are police boxes, yes, but even in the densest parts of Tokyo there are no more than one or two per kilometer. They're mostly located adjacent to train stations, and they serve as much as street guides ("where's the nearest ramen shop?") as anything else. I certainly don't feel oppressed by them; if anything, it's good to know that in an emergency the police can arrive quickly from the police box, rather than having to come all the way from the station which may be on the other side of town. (Plus, there's recently been a spate of police impropriety, and people are watching the police pretty closely.)

  213. satisfaciton w/o emotions? by anomaly · · Score: 2

    I think that you're missing out on an incredibly rich component of relationship by having sex merley for the purpose of conquest or release.

    It's like seeing a hot fudge sundae, having your mouth water, and not ever tasting the dessert, yet pretending that you're enjoying that as much as you would if you ate it.

    Sure, sex w/o an emotional connection feels good, but fulfilling? You must either be joking or in denial because you're not willing to pay what it costs to have a genunine relationship.

    Respectfully,
    Anomaly

    --
    But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    1. Re:satisfaciton w/o emotions? by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      You've missed out on the facts of course. Didn't say there couldn't be an emotional component nor that I was unfamiliar with or against it. I just said that didn't have to be the only way to do it. Additionally, your sundae analogy is nonsensical.

      Your ad hominem attack at the end doesn't do your argument any justice, either. There are several websites that address that logical fallacy that you might want to look into. Since you couldn't possibly have any idea what my situation is your comments there have no validity.

    2. Re:satisfaciton w/o emotions? by anomaly · · Score: 2

      WRT ad hominem attack, I belive that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

      On what basis did you make the judgement "bad for you" in your original posting? Who says that my position is bad?

      Respectfully,
      Anomaly

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    3. Re:satisfaciton w/o emotions? by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      I say your position is bad. It's been the whole thrust of my argument that you shouldn't say there is ONLY one way. However, that seems to be what you insist on doing. If you misunderstood, I meant that you are entitled to your opinion but acting like anyone elses is invalid if it does not agree with yours is silly. It denies you credibility and makes you look closed-minded.

    4. Re:satisfaciton w/o emotions? by anomaly · · Score: 2

      Fair enough, but with no objective standard on which to base judgements, it's nothing more than your opinion. That's the problem with relativism. It's just your opinion that it's "bad" for me to believe that there is one way (for anything.)

      If there are objective standards that transcend individuals and cultures, then there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way - a "good" and a "bad."

      If there are no standards, then the rightness or wrongness is completely dependent on who you ask - and life is pretty meaningless.

      As far as closd-minded is concerned, is it closed minded to say that when the sun is visible that it is daytime, or is it merely accurate?

      --
      But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    5. Re:satisfaciton w/o emotions? by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      Given that there is no objective standard, I suppose you have to go with a best guess average. It's not as if there's any single agreed upon standard of what God decrees -- given that at least 3 of the major religions consider themselves to have the same God (not counting many of the smaller religions) but have differing ideas on what it all means. These differeing standards do not make life meaningless. How can life be meaningless if someone doesn't agree with you? That's a silly assertion to make. It's rhetoric with no basis.

      You picked a poor example for closed mindedness. Is it accurate to define daytime as when the sun is visible? There can be entire days when the sun is not visible. Does that make it no longer daytime? In either case, silly questions with meaningless answers don't demonstrate anything, and analogies make poor arguments. :)

  214. Walmart and Censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Walmart has been censoring a lot of things before this even came out. Look at all the CDs and music that they restrict. I bought a CD once at Walmart and let me tell you, it wasn't the same. Brought it right back and that's how I found out. So this game is just along their lines. Let's just all boycott Walmart and shop at Meijer or something similiar.

  215. The provability of the existence of God by Chastitina · · Score: 1

    WRT the provability of the existence of God - I'm curious...what evidence would be sufficient to convince you?

    How about consistent, reproducible, scientific evidence?

    Oh, wait, in order to meet scientific standards, you must have a falsifiable hypothesis. Unfortunately the definition of God prevents testing of the falsifiable hypothesis "There is a God."

    I choose to err on the side of simplicity, with an infinite and random universe that is large enough for extremely unlikely events (such as life and evolution) to occur. There's no need for a higher power to explain anything, just a sufficiently large universe.

    "C"

  216. Re:Guns are necessary for a free society. by dwaggie · · Score: 1

    To be fair, you also have a completely different social climate, with extremely different ideas of what is expected of someone, and with completely different reactions as to what to do when something 'wrong' happens to you.

  217. Re:Just some info taken from "Bowling for Columbin by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

    OK it's Walmarts fault this guy killed himself how? Excuse me if I don't feel bad about this. The judge who would Walmart negligent shoul dhave lost his job in the next election. Also, just becaus eyou had these two "incidents" happen does not mean it's a common everyday thing and does not mean Walmart is bad for selling firearms or ammunition. No matter how you restrict guns, those who want to obtain them for illegal purposes WILL obtain them. When guns are made illegal, then only criminals will have them. The guy who shot his instructor had something WRONG with him. I am sick and tired of the government trying to protect me from myself. The only thing the government needs to protect me from is enemys of the state like Iraq, Osama bin Laden and possibly North Korea. TH\he reason this "gun" thing is being percieved as a problem because every liberal news organization latches on to every little thing and blows it WAYYYY out of proportion. What's really amazing is that when Columbine happened, school violence and incidents of the Columbine nature was going DOWN! What's even more amazing is that Klebold and the other kid's parents never spotted the guns, and other items in their son's room. Everyone is into giving their kids "privacy". Well, unless your 18 and out of your parents house you have NO privcay and your parents are responsible for not only your behavior, but all of their guests. They should have seen their rooms. PLain and simple. Then they would have gotten the help they should have and Columbine may never had happened. Bowling for Columbine is an intersting movie and I may check it out.

    --

    Gorkman

  218. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    To converse at the distance of the Indes by means of sympathetic contrivances
    may be as natural to future times as to us is a literary correspondence.
    -- Joseph Glanvill, 1661

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...