Duke Nukem Forever Multiplayer Mode Predictably Controversial

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Duke Nukem Forever Multiplayer Mode Predictably Controversial

Posted by Soulskill on Monday March 21, 2011 @05:26PM from the what-do-you-do-when-your-dishwasher-stops-working dept.

Gearbox Software has released some information about the multiplayer modes for Duke Nukem Forever, which is due out May 3rd (for real this time). In addition to standard deathmatch (called Dukematch), team deathmatch and a king-of-the-hill mode, there is "Capture the Babe," in which a typical CTF flag is replaced by a woman. Eurogamer explains it thus: "... when you grab the other team's babe, she sometimes 'freaks out.' The solution? Give her a gentle smack." Gearbox's Randy Pitchford, clearly understanding how politically incorrect this sounds, said, "You can get some things across in screenshots but not really. So we're kinda struggling with how we expose it so people understand what's there. The proof is in the pudding so to speak, so I don't want to talk about it too much."

344 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Oh Duke... by Shikaku · 2011-03-21 17:27 · Score: 5, Funny

When will you ever stop being awesome?
1. Re:Oh Duke... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 17:45 · Score: 1
  
  BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS
2. Re:Oh Duke... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 17:55 · Score: 0
  
  I'm going to rip off your head and shit down your throat.
3. Re:Oh Duke... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 18:40 · Score: 1
  
  Neck, buddy... Neck!
4. Re:Oh Duke... by Gaygirlie · 2011-03-21 22:00 · Score: 2
  
  Duke WAS awesome. He has developed some... character issues over the last ten years, though.
  http://thepunchlineismachismo.com/archives/275
5. Re:Oh Duke... by android.dreamer · 2011-03-21 22:40 · Score: 1
  
  Hail to the king, baby!
6. Re:Oh Duke... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 00:17 · Score: 0
  
  The only time it's ever acceptable to "hit" a woman is when you're "hitting" that pussy every which way. There ought to be a combo move that kicks off a 30-minute scene where Duke gives her a good dicking to calm her down.
7. Re:Oh Duke... by elrous0 · 2011-03-22 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  When will you ever stop being awesome?
  On April 1st, when Gearbox reveals it was all an elaborate April fool's Day joke.
  
  --
  SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
8. Re:Oh Duke... by dbialac · 2011-03-22 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  Speaking of character issues: So you're capturing the other team's babe. What do you do with her once you have successfully captured her? You've already slapped her silly. It seems to insinuate a forced sexual act of some sort. Or does she become submissive and just go down on you?
9. Re:Oh Duke... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 03:44 · Score: 0
  
  I've got balls of steel!
10. Re:Oh Duke... by DaVince21 · 2011-03-27 02:57 · Score: 1
  
  More precisely, I'll rip your head off and shit down your neck.
  
  --
  I am not devoid of humor.
Ok, great... by Quiet_Desperation · 2011-03-21 17:30 · Score: 0

Can we hear about Borderlands 2 yet?
1. Re:Ok, great... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 17:51 · Score: 0
  
  No
2. Re:Ok, great... by Opportunist · 2011-03-21 17:53 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Why would anyone want a sequel to that?
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
3. Re:Ok, great... by lennier1 · 2011-03-21 20:06 · Score: 2
  
  The same people who pay to be beaten with a whip?
4. Re:Ok, great... by ProppaT · 2011-03-22 00:42 · Score: 1
  
  It made a lot of peoples Best of 2009 list, including mine. It wasn't made to appeal to the hardcore FPS crowd, it was made to appeal to a more general audience and a cross over hack 'n' slash rpg audience and it did a great job of it. Borderlands 2 is definitely sitting on the top of my most wanted list, right next to Diablo III.
  
  --
  Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
5. Re:Ok, great... by soupforare · 2011-03-22 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  Ridiculous vehicle mode, only two weapons, extremely quick development time... This IS Borderlands 2.
  
  --
  --- Do you believe in the day?
6. Re:Ok, great... by Quiet_Desperation · 2011-03-22 03:15 · Score: 1
  
  *shrug* I got really good at the vehicles in Borderlands, almost as good as some games where driving is the primary point. I was always the designated driver in co-op.
7. Re:Ok, great... by Quiet_Desperation · 2011-03-22 03:20 · Score: 1
  
  It appealed to a lot of hardcore RPG types, including me and my sister (who would inject distilled Elder Scrolls into her veins if she could). I told her to stick to skooma.
Cannot believe by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 17:32 · Score: 0

I can't believe no games have done babe capturing. I didn't care about DnF before, but after reading that summary it sounds like an instant classic.
1. Re:Cannot believe by MikeDaSpike · 2011-03-21 18:01 · Score: 1
  
  Postal 2, I believe it was called "Capture the Snitch" or something like that,
2. Re:Cannot believe by Corbets · 2011-03-21 18:11 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Postal 2, I believe it was called "Capture the Snitch" or something like that,
  Really? Cuz "Capture the Snatch" sounds a lot more interesting.
3. Re:Cannot believe by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 21:19 · Score: 1
  
  I can't believe no games have done babe capturing. I didn't care about DnF before, but after reading that summary it sounds like an instant classic.
  For the N64, there was a post-apocalyptic tank game. Each of the clans/tribes/groups were led by a woman because they were so rare. One of the types of multiplayer match types was to abduct her and take her back to your own clan/tribe/group. DNF is not the first technically, but she was effectively a flag, and not the lattice type.
4. Re:Cannot believe by JosKarith · 2011-03-21 21:28 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  Catch the Snatch. It's gotta rhyme or people won't remember it.
  
  --
  'Don't worry' said the trees when they saw the axe coming, 'The handle is one of us.'
5. Re:Cannot believe by dino2gnt · 2011-03-22 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  It was actually just called "Snatch", and had a corresponding mode called "Grab."
  
  --
  Future events such as these may affect you in the future!
6. Re:Cannot believe by bughunter · 2011-03-22 04:05 · Score: 1
  
  Wasn't babe [re]capturing the entire premise behind Super Mario Brothers?
  
  --
  I can see the fnords!
7. Re:Cannot believe by matt_gaia · 2011-03-22 04:11 · Score: 1
  
  GTA IV also had a mission where you captured some mobbed-up chick and took her hostage as well (the name of it escapes me, ATM).
8. Re:Cannot believe by Lunzo · 2011-03-22 15:16 · Score: 1
  
  Whoooooooooosh!
  (unless Grab has a second meaning I'm unfamiliar with).
9. Re:Cannot believe by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 22:35 · Score: 0
  
  Come on, this is Postal 2, not Harry Potter!
Well they could take that out... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 17:34 · Score: -1

Or how bout they just stop wasting their lives on such a cliche project?
1. Re:Well they could take that out... by Shikaku · 2011-03-21 17:41 · Score: 2
  
  The game is already done. All that needs to be done now is getting it "Gold," which means printed, discs pressed, etc.
  So to answer your question, yes, they will stop wasting their lives on such a cliche project.
2. Re:Well they could take that out... by epyT-R · 2011-03-21 18:41 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  if you're gonna complain about cliches, at least focus on the present. duke is the exception, not the norm these days. what's wrong with a bit of male-archetype cliche? there's tons of 'girl power' moments in the media, making them a cliche stereotype in their own right. hell there are whole shows devoted to showing women in power, running everything, while the males are either kiss-up-captain-save-a-hos, criminals, or, some kind of sex abusers. oh right, I forgot, according to the feminist, male assertion of any kind = 'misogyny', but when females do it to males, it's 'empowerment.' I'm wonderin if the relatively recent intolerance towards the duke character has more to do with increasing gynocentricity and less to do with the drama surrounding the game's development. I say this because in the last few years I've noticed a lot of 'male chauvinist' critiques as a reason to diss the game. sure, they've always been there, even back in the 90s, but today, it seems like the most common complaint. Everyone knows there are far more pertinent attributes that can make a game suck.
  The duke aint' PC.. that's what makes him cool. characters like this are the vaccine to the real-damage that the PC-shielding of ideology can do to society. it prevents critique of any kind out of "respect for others' feelings." I'm sure I"ll be modded down into oblivion for even suggesting this. oh well.
3. Re:Well they could take that out... by lennier1 · 2011-03-21 20:24 · Score: 1
  
  Hell, half the fun of Duke Nukem is that it's making fun of so many non-PC cliches it's always one step short of achieving critical mass.
4. Re:Well they could take that out... by dave420 · 2011-03-21 23:55 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  If women had the same status in society - the same pay, same chances of being attacked, the same future prospects, and the same level of domestic abuse that men have - you'd have a point. As it currently stands, it's far worse (in the terms stated above) to be a woman than a man, so it's not really unexpected for people to cry foul when someone does something that seems to suggest that imbalance is somehow acceptable. Pushed to more extreme positions, your argument carries the same logical weight that arguing for the Klan was fine during the civil rights movement would. "Hey! Black folks are all uppity about something, so why not white folks!"
  I personally don't have a problem with Duke Nukem, but I'm not so arrogant as to wonder why other people do have a problem with it. Political correctness is not designed to protect people's feelings, but to stem the flow of people being inaccurate about other people, which admittedly is the source of a lot of bad feelings, but the correction of that is merely the result of the rational thinking introduced by being politically correct, and not the main aim. Don't think of it as "political correctness", but simply "correctness" or "accuracy in viewing other people".
  Sorry if I sound like a jerk.
5. Re:Well they could take that out... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 01:51 · Score: 1
  
  Don't think of it as "political correctness", but simply "correctness" or "accuracy in viewing other people".
  Accuracy my ass. Political correctness is all about sacrificing accuracy to make sure that nobody feels bad. Try telling someone that an incompetent woman got a good job because of her looks, and it's sexist. If that incompetent person is a minority, it's racism. This when it's a documented fact that handsome people are more successful and where affirmative action is actual policy. You simply cannot accuse anyone of incompetence unless they're white males. Accuracy would be looking at the record of their accomplishments, not their sex or color of their skin. But that's frowned upon.
  Honestly, people assaulting other people (women or men) is completely inexcusable. Unless it's in a movie or video game. Do you know why? Because it's fake. Let's worry about real life and leave our Duke Nukem and James Bond fantasies alone, ok?
6. Re:Well they could take that out... by ShavedOrangutan · 2011-03-22 02:54 · Score: 2
  
  I personally know more relationships where the woman is the abusive partner. The difference is, in those situations the man suffers in silence (guess who always gets the kids, house, child support, and alimony after a separation).
  
  Also, every job I've ever had in my entire life, the boss has been a woman. CEO is irrelevant - there's a lot more bias there than just gender. The person in the corner office has been a woman in every company I've ever worked for without exception.
  
  --
  Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
7. Re:Well they could take that out... by Stargoat · 2011-03-22 02:59 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Women under the age of 30 in urban centers make more money than men. More women today are graduating with college degrees than men. This has been happening for years.
  Basically, in places where the average man doesn't burn out his body working on a farm or in construction, women are making more money than men.
  The feminist movement is over. They won. Women are now equal or superior to men.
  It is time to end Title IX. It is time to bring education standards back up so that we can make sure little Johnny gets the same education little Suzie does.
  
  --
  Hoist Number One and Number Six.
8. Re:Well they could take that out... by TheRaven64 · 2011-03-22 04:23 · Score: 1
  
  Half the fun of Duke Nukem is that he's such an overdone stereotype. He takes the action hero archetype so far beyond its logical conclusion that you can't be offended by it because it's so ridiculous. Remember kids, guns don't kill mutants, I kill mutants!
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
9. Re:Well they could take that out... by sorak · 2011-03-22 07:40 · Score: 1
  
  Ok, so women have commercials where guys are depicted as lovable dummies, some as wife-beaters, and most as bad-boy womanizers.
  Men now have a game where the hero is portrayed as a rapist who kidnaps and beats women.
  How are these two the comparable?
10. Re:Well they could take that out... by EMeta · 2011-03-22 09:00 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, I see. Women who have gone through college (and probably have much more debt for it) are finally making more money than men who haven't. That's the conclusion from the article you linked. Well, bully for them. However if you account for education, women are still making 75% of what men do: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/Women_in_America.pdf. So forgive me for not celebrating yet.
11. Re:Well they could take that out... by brkello · 2011-03-22 10:05 · Score: 1
  
  I totally agree that it should be fine to make a non-PC game like this. Sounds funny to me. Don't be surprised that people are going to be offended by it, though.
  
  And really, your little rant is a load of crap. And no, I am not a female. There are negative stereotypes and double standards on both sides. You are the one acting like that sad little victim in a harsh female dominated world. Give me a break. Just because good looking women don't pay attention to you doesn't mean that all inequalities have been solved. I mean "gynocentricity"? Come on man, wipe the Cheeto crumbs off your shirt, hit the gym, and maybe you'll land a date. This whole mentality of crying how hard it is to be male in this world is just hilarious. Seriously, if the world is "gynocentric", your are part of the problem with your wussy/complaining attitude. Act like a man and maybe you will be treated like one.
  
  --
  Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
12. Re:Well they could take that out... by brkello · 2011-03-22 10:08 · Score: 1
  
  So people who went through college make more money than people who don't. Big shocker there! There is no such thing as equality. There are always going to be advantage to being a male or a female in and out of the work place. This may shift over time to mean different things. But to say women have won and are equal or superior is just flat out stupid. You look at a few statistics and make the conclusion that the male-dominated world is over. I thought people on here were smarter than this fluff.
  
  --
  Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
13. Re:Well they could take that out... by Stargoat · 2011-03-22 13:57 · Score: 1
  
  No, the point is that women who go though college are making more than men who go through college. I'm sorry that contradicts your womyn's studies professor, but it is true. Further, women who have not dropped out of the workforce to have children are making more money than men.
  It's over. The feminist movement is over. Women have achieved parity with men.
  
  --
  Hoist Number One and Number Six.
14. Re:Well they could take that out... by Stargoat · 2011-03-22 14:08 · Score: 1
  
  I thought people on here were smarter than this fluff.
  I did too. I guess I need to spell it out.
  You seem to misunderstand the concept of trends. The Y generation (or cohort if you like) is developing into the workplace. Low and behold, the women in this cohort are making more money than the men. This is the first time this has ever happened (Margret Mead's lies aside). Further, the women under the age of 30 (the Y cohort) are getting promotions faster than the men and they are earning increases in income faster than men.
  The workplace has fundamentally changed. This needs to be addressed.
  And I'll say further. The reason why the workplace has fundamentally changed is because we have handicapped boys rather than promoting girls. In the United States the form of feminism as implemented has not been pro-women, but rather it has been misandric. The implementation of the feminist standards has dumbed down the education demanded of boys to suit the demands of the feminist population.
  
  --
  Hoist Number One and Number Six.
15. Re:Well they could take that out... by epyT-R · 2011-03-22 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  I suspect your stats are misleading, gleaned from particular institutions with particular agendas and ideologies.. the only truthful thing one can say about discrimination is that:
  1. it happens to everyone sometimes. deal with it. if it's institutionalized, you should be able to do something about it assuming the discrimination is based upon irrelevant attributes, regardless of what attributes are at issue. this is NOT what the current politics supports, though this is what's preached in their speeches.
  2. all of the activist groups (especially the politically established ones) preach tolerance at the expense of liberty while practicing (lobbying for law) institutionalized bigotry towards the other side(s)
  3. being 'uppity' about something does not mean the argument is wrong.. in the same way that blacks were being 'uppity' about their rights, the political movements which support them are dead set on ensuring that whites are held down. it's ok to build a school for poor non-white kids, but not poor white kids. it's ok to have a womens-only college, but forget about a men-only college. politicians find every loophole in the book to shut down one side, while openly ignoring grievous abuse by the other. all part of what political correctness does: prevent rational discussion, and most importantly, critique of ideas, solely to prevent 'offense' of others' 'feelings.' it's a dirty trick that's been around a long time..
Capture the ... mod by Michael+Woodhams · 2011-03-21 17:35 · Score: 4, Funny

Megatokyo style

--
Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
Intellectual sources by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 17:43 · Score: -1

The new Duke Nukem should come with endorsements for http://roissy.wordpress.com, http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com, and http://www.takeninhand.com
1. Re:Intellectual sources by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 23:00 · Score: 0
  
  Gah, blogs for insecure men who think you can learn to be alpha. Saddest thing on the Internet.
2. Re:Intellectual sources by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 23:58 · Score: 0
  
  You can't become alpha, but you can fake it. Duke Nukem is the only alpha male left, and he's not even real.
Multiplayer mode by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 17:47 · Score: 1

The capture the bimbo three way promises to be a popular mode.
Well... by creat3d · 2011-03-21 17:49 · Score: -1, Troll

I for one cannot wait for the day this goddamn game is finally forgotten. My prediction: about the end of May 2011.

--
Grammar nazis are to this community what excrements are to gold.
1. Re:Well... by dskzero · 2011-03-21 17:51 · Score: 1
  
  This is ironic.
  
  --
  Oblivion Awaits
Capture the Babe by themoneyish · 2011-03-21 17:50 · Score: 1

... I hope when we capture the babe, he says "Hail to the King, Baby!"
Capture the Babe... by Phoobarnvaz · 2011-03-21 17:56 · Score: 2

"... when you grab the other team's babe, she sometimes 'freaks out.' The solution? Give her a gentle smack."

Reminds me of a quote from Sean Connery from his James Bond days..."Sometimes...you just have to hit a woman."

Personally...I think you should have to find a roll of duct tape to be able to take with you. That way...when you get her...you can duct tape her hands/feet together and put a strip across her mouth. Takes care of her fighting and keeps her quiet. What more can a man ask for...a submissive woman who can't gripe at you.;)

--
Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia. - Charles M. Schulz
1. Re:Capture the Babe... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 05:47 · Score: 0
  
  Duct tape: It turns "no, no, no" into "mmm, mmm, mmm".
  /not mine
2. Re:Capture the Babe... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-23 08:03 · Score: 0
  
  I predict this will be modded in within 5 days of release..
Wait, What? by Greyfox · 2011-03-21 17:59 · Score: 1

There's just all sorts of "Wait, What" in this story...

--
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
1. Re:Wait, What? by dgatwood · 2011-03-21 18:16 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Yeah, I mean misogyny in a Duke Nukem game, I can believe, but do you really expect me to believe that DNF is going to ship!?!
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
What, no co-op? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 17:59 · Score: 3, Insightful

One of the best parts of Duke3d (along with many other classic FPSes) was the cooperative play mode. Leaving it out is bullshit; some people actually like to play these games with friends instead of against them.
1. Re:What, no co-op? by Ailure · 2011-03-22 21:43 · Score: 1
  
  It's trickier to add co-op in modern FPS games, mostly due to ingame events and such that can cut you off etc. It's usually a deliberate design choice by the designers so they don't feel limited by it.
  Sometimes people mod in coop though. Like with Half Life 2 see http://synergymod.net/ (although HL2 gets ridiculously easy when four-eight players are plowing through it).
wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 18:01 · Score: 0, Troll

Violence against women, great job. Been waiting years for this one Duke.
1. Re:wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 19:18 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  All violence is wrong. Not all men are tough like Duke, some are quite the opposite and aren't aggressive at all.
  Your comment bothers me. Most people agree that violence against women is wrong. Those who don't will never change their mind.
  But few people are even aware that thousands of men every day are abused by women. Lots of men are also bullied by other men, it happens in high schools, at work, in bars, at home... Games like Duke Nukem are 90% made of violence against males, reinforcing the stereotype that men are tough and aggressive and don't mind fighting whether they beat someone up or get beaten up.
  If you think violence is wrong, fine. If you want to complain about it, fine. But please be fair and complain about the violence that most deserves complaints. And please treat men and women equally.
  Also, I think it's misleading to say Duke is disrespectful of women. The girls in those games are whores who enjoy being treated like sex objects, not average, decent, self-respecting women.
  Funny how women seem to enjoy a special, superior and privileged status in some people's minds. Funny how those who are so eager to defend women seem to judge them not on who they are as people but on who they are in terms of gender. In my opinion THAT is sexist.
  Anyway, I think you should know nobody takes Duke seriously. Everyone knows he's a macho stereotype. People find Duke Nukem funny because they know what he does violates many social rules.
2. Re:wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 19:26 · Score: 1
  
  Uhh, it's a video game dude. Grow up.
3. Re:wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 19:51 · Score: 1
  
  There's a big difference between videogame violence in the form of combat against aggressors who will kill you otherwise, and videogame violence in the form of smacking a woman that is owned by the opposing team and you're trying to essentially kidnap.
  So no, we can't treat men and women equally here, because they're not being represented equally. Men are the powerful, combative, playable entity, struggling for control over the arena, showing all the intelligence of whoever's holding the controller. Women are an item to be hoarded and, if necessary, beaten into submission. You really don't see the difference?
4. Re:wrong by Hazel+Bergeron · 2011-03-21 21:47 · Score: 1
  
  Women are an item to be hoarded and, if necessary, beaten into submission.
  Soldiers are an item to be hoarded and, if necessary, beaten into submission.
  Of course, the first thing you must do to wage war is to dehumanise the enemy soldier in the eyes of your own soldiers. Then you make up for it by treating enemy non-combatants, cooperative or otherwise, with some faux reverence. It's been a thoroughly successful manipulation.
5. Re:wrong by elrous0 · 2011-03-22 01:30 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Most people agree that violence against women is wrong.
  No, most people agree that violence against INNOCENT women is wrong (men too, for that matter). Cops beat down drunken, crazy women all the time. Soldiers shoot them if they're carrying a rifle or bomb. And if one of them is coming at you with a knife, I'm pretty sure you're not going to give her flowers.
  You *DO* support women's equality, right? Because you sure sound like a sexist to me.
  
  --
  SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
6. Re:wrong by makomk · 2011-03-22 02:30 · Score: 1
  
  Of course, the first thing you must do to wage war is to dehumanise the enemy soldier in the eyes of your own soldiers. Then you make up for it by treating enemy non-combatants, cooperative or otherwise, with some faux reverence.
  More than just that. One of the oldest and most successful ways of dehumanising the enemy soldier is to portray them as evil monsters that are attacking poor defenceless women (possibly even raping them), and then tell your own soldiers and male populace that it's their duty as men to fight and die to protect the women. Offering women and women's sexuality as a reward for the men that fight and survive is also common, though technically optional. This game seems to fit right into that pattern.
7. Re:wrong by sonicmerlin · 2011-03-22 14:07 · Score: 1
  
  Cops beat down drunken, crazy women all the time.
  No they don't. If they did they'd be brought to court and sentenced for abuse.
  
  a sexist
  I like how you've changed the word from an adjective into a noun. No dehumanization or prejudice there.
8. Re:wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-24 01:15 · Score: 0
  
  Women are an item to be hoarded and, if necessary, beaten into submission.
  Soldiers are an item to be hoarded and, if necessary, beaten into submission.
  Umm, we're talking about the game here, not actual warfare. I'm alarmed you are unaware of the difference. In a game setting, at least a general CtF settings such as this, your forces are other players to work with or ignore, and the enemy forces are simply to be shot on sight. However, the key thing is that they are in the same situation, and have the same abilities and resources; it is still, if nothing else, "fair". We can certainly argue the merits of this in and of itself, but that's not really what my argument is about.
  You face the enemy soldiers, the other players, on an equal footing. You all have the same abilities and resources, and you shoot at them because they shoot at you. Meanwhile, you have the enemy *babes* who are powerless, submissive, incapable of defending themself, and on top of that you add a gameplay element where you occasionally have to *hit them*? Again, the male and female figures in the game are being represented in completely different manners, and simply saying "well, worse things happen in war" is not even close to the point. This isn't war. It's a game, a mass produced entertainment item, where a bunch of male avatars shoot it each other in a tug of war for female avatars. And the violence isn't real, no-one actually gets hurt... but the settings being portrayed contains real sexism, with women being depicted as weak, submissive people with no right or method to defend themselves, to be hit when they don't comply. The other players can hit back. That's the difference.
The Duke ain't PC by Opportunist · 2011-03-21 18:01 · Score: 4, Insightful

He's not politically correct. He's in fact not correct at all.
Dammit, it's a friggin' GAME! OK? It's a GAME! Treat it as such. We're talking about a steroid-pumped, bubblegum-chewing, over-the-top cliché pseudo-hero. I wouldn't say it's suitable for 10 year olds (or other people of similar feeble intellect that could take a computer game serious like, say, certain politicians or a certain ex-lawyer we all love so much), but why should you have to apologize as a computer game company for making a corny game?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
1. Re:The Duke ain't PC by scdeimos · 2011-03-21 18:24 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  We're talking about a steroid-pumped, bubblegum-chewing, over-the-top cliché pseudo-hero.
  You forgot: "... who likes punching aliens in the balls."
2. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Merls+the+Sneaky · 2011-03-21 18:24 · Score: 2
  
  So we can look, forward to DNF being rated RC and becoming DN Never in Australia.
  Fucking fascist government.
3. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 18:31 · Score: -1
  
  He's not politically correct. He's in fact not correct at all.
  Dammit, it's a friggin' GAME! OK? It's a GAME! Treat it as such. We're talking about a steroid-pumped, bubblegum-chewing, over-the-top cliché pseudo-hero. I wouldn't say it's suitable for 10 year olds (or other people of similar feeble intellect that could take a computer game serious like, say, certain politicians or a certain ex-lawyer we all love so much), but why should you have to apologize as a computer game company for making a corny game?
  Sadly, it's probably this (the teen) demographic that will flock to this game mode. :(
  I just hope they've made the game hard enough to deter the younger players.
4. Re:The Duke ain't PC by LordLucless · 2011-03-21 19:02 · Score: 1
  
  Like it's ever stopped us getting games before. Anyway, we should be putting that behind us real soon now.
  
  --
  Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
5. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Viceice · 2011-03-21 19:19 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  It's like how people don't understand parody and satire. I just watch and laugh sometimes at how some people are so upset when comedy is made about race, religion, gender etc.
  Yes, people get hurt when you say the wrong thing, but people also need to learn to chill, take a step back and laugh at themselves once in a while.
  
  --
  Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
6. Re:The Duke ain't PC by atomicbutterfly · 2011-03-21 19:44 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  but why should you have to apologize as a computer game company for making a corny game?
  Because this isn't the easy-going days of gaming (as in the 90's). Nowadays, people for some reason want to be offended just so they can get their 2 minutes of Internet fame as they're quoted in multiple sites. Bonus points if they're behind some shitty "family" organization or group who loves the publicity.
7. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Adam+Jorgensen · 2011-03-21 19:52 · Score: 1, Troll
  
  Okay, I'm a little sick of this apologist shit...
  Let's be frank: Parody and satire can be clever and they can also be funny. However, they can also fall flat, usually as a result of being stupid.
  DNF does not classify as intelligent parody or satire. It classifies as juvenile BS.
  Claiming that those people, like myself, who find DNF to be unfunny and rather insulting are missing the point and not getting the joke is ignoring the
  fact that DNF is frankly a piece of crap in the humour department.
  Unless moronic humour like this appeals, in which case be my guest and enjoy this sack of crap game for all it's worth...
  Personally, I got over the DNF brand of humour when I stopped being 15...
8. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 20:09 · Score: 0
  
  why should you have to apologize as a computer game company for making a corny game?
  If you make some shitty game, and try to boost your sales by throwing in needless smut, then yeah, you should apologize. DNF is a game that shouldn't have even been made, they're just capitalizing on a tired old internet meme.
9. Re:The Duke ain't PC by martin-boundary · 2011-03-21 20:41 · Score: 1
  
  It's not just a rippin' game franchise, it's a TOTALLY AWESOME MOVIE even!
10. Re:The Duke ain't PC by L4t3r4lu5 · 2011-03-21 21:06 · Score: 1
  
  Because idiot parents will buy this for their 10 year old, and they will promptly "attitude adjust" a girl in their class. As is usual, the content of the game will be blamed for corrupting the youth of today, and the parent will get some free airtime talking about how she didn't know the game would be like that. It'll somehow be linked to extremism or a latent desire to commit homicide, and (mostly) mature adults will be left playing Happy Rainbow Pony Fair Ground Ride XVI and watching the god damn Teletubbies.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
11. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-21 21:27 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I wouldn't say it's suitable for 10 year olds
  Really? I would. In order for these ten year olds to believe that a game is actually reality, they would likely have to be already insane and would have to have terrible parents who do nothing but censor everything instead of educating them about things. Really, the chances of someone (even a child) believing this game is reality are slim to none, I believe. The chances of this actually hurting someone are likely even slimmer. The temporary violent thoughts that some studies correlated to violent media almost never amount to anything.
  I'd say it's suitable for anything unless the person is insane and/or has terrible parents.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
12. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 21:32 · Score: 0
  
  Some people are angry at their governments because they are involved in wars, torture, illegal trade, and corruption. Merls the Sneaky is angry at his government because they might not let him play a computer game, and uses words like 'fascist' to make it sound like its important and he has the slightest clue what he is talking about. The irony in all this is that in a few years time, after all these people having been overusing words like 'fascist', 'oppression', 'tryranny', 'censorship' and referencing 1984 when talking about silly shit like this, that it will be their own goddam fault when once powerful words become utterly trivial, and their 'Orwellian' future comes true.
13. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-21 21:34 · Score: 2
  
  Because idiot parents will buy this for their 10 year old, and they will promptly "attitude adjust" a girl in their class.
  The amount of children that view/play violent media is likely staggeringly high. How many of them are actually insane enough actually imitate the violence and try it on others? Most of them know that it's fiction. Most of them know that they do not wish to hurt others simply because they saw it done in a work of fiction. The most any studies have been able to 'prove' is that violent media can be linked to temporary violent thoughts that almost never amount to anything (not even in children). If some abysmally small minority of people who are 'insane' (and if they are children, have terrible parents who censor everything instead of educating them about the difference between fiction and reality) imitate violence they see in violent media, then that is too bad. Those few shouldn't be able to ruin it for everyone else (children or not).
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
14. Re:The Duke ain't PC by L4t3r4lu5 · 2011-03-21 21:55 · Score: 2
  
  How many of them are actually insane enough actually imitate the violence and try it on others?
  One. Then, Fox News will get hold of the story, and it'll be the second coming of Pol Pot. Don't pretend it won't happen.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
15. Re:The Duke ain't PC by rikkards · 2011-03-21 21:59 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I would mod you up (I will probably get modded down (s'alright I have tons of karma) as what you say has a large grain of truth. Also regarding what the GP said, usually the people who say others need to lighten up have never been on the butt end of the joke and usually are part of the demographic majority who get a tad offended/feel persecuted when society tries to balance out the rights they have always had that other minorities have not i.e religious rights, same-sex marriage, etc.
16. Re:The Duke ain't PC by android.dreamer · 2011-03-21 22:42 · Score: 1
  
  I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum.
17. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 22:46 · Score: 1
  
  You're ... not a parent, are you?
  Fuck, I hope not anyway.
18. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-21 23:04 · Score: 1
  
  Why do you say that? Is education not possible? Are children not able to tell the difference? I certainly could. Even if they can't (which is a very small minority of people), that is where the parent comes in. They do not need to ban the violent media. They merely need to tell the child that it is not real. If a parent does not have the time to do that, they should not be parents at all.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
19. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-21 23:05 · Score: 1
  
  I see. Yes, they do tend to exaggerate things greatly. That, however, does not warrant people banning/censoring things for specific groups of people (children in this case) just to appease these imbeciles.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
20. Re:The Duke ain't PC by petermgreen · 2011-03-21 23:58 · Score: 1
  
  Afaict the way to get arround this is to keep a seperate brand for your "adult" games push that as the brand for your adult games. So when people think of "the company behind GTA" they think "rockstar games" not "take 2 interactive".
  
  --
  note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
21. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 00:00 · Score: 0
  
  I used to play Duke3d when I was ten, it was awesome! I turned out all right it seems. :)
22. Re:The Duke ain't PC by geminidomino · 2011-03-22 00:24 · Score: 0
  
  Oh, lighten up and get over it, you whimpering pantywaste.
  Nice touch, accusing everyone who disagrees with your sniveling of being a Republican, but too obvious.
  7/10 on the troll-o-meter.
  11/10 on the worthless pussy scale.
23. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 00:35 · Score: 0, Informative
  
  Now I REALLY hope you aren't a parent. Yes parental guidance is important, but assuming that one at that age is going to take everything you say as gospel is sheer lunacy. They will test.
24. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 00:39 · Score: 0
  
  I'm going to play devil's advocate here. How about a new Redneck Rampage game with a multiplayer game mode 'Capture the Nigger'. This would be different how?
  This stuff is always light-hearted and hilarious, unless you happen to be in the targeted group (a woman, or in this case black). Then this shit doesn't seem as amusing.
  Since slashdot's pretty much all white males and Gearbox's gender/race composition is likely the same, it's not too surprising that the biased consensus here is 'it's just a joke get over it'.
25. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 00:51 · Score: 0
  
  Really. I remember getting DN3D when I was about ten, and returning it within hours. I didn't find it scary, unsuitable or insulting just as a child I found it lacking any form of coherent story, and for that matter fun.
26. Re:The Duke ain't PC by vgerclover · 2011-03-22 00:52 · Score: 1
  
  Are you telling me that a game about Alien Police Pigs and a guy in a tight shirt shooting freezing or shrinkin' rays isn't a documentary!?
27. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Troll-in-Training · 2011-03-22 01:07 · Score: 1
  
  The most any studies have been able to 'prove' is that violent media can be linked to temporary violent thoughts that almost never amount to anything (not even in children).
  Albert Bandura and the Bobo Doll experiment was the first to document a link between observing violent behavior and copying it, if you need more proof just look at the number of kids hospitalized from imitating Pro Wrestling and those Jackass shows.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobo_doll_experiment
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHHdovKHDNU&feature=related
28. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 01:08 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sorry most kids are morons. 10 year old boys more so. Kids at that age imitate what they see. They want to fit in.
  This is a 13-15+ game for a boy. And a 11-13 for a girl. If you dont think those 3-5 years make a difference you didnt pay attention when you grew up or are someone who thinks they can handle it.
  There will be *some* who can. It is up to the parents to judge if someone that young is mentally ready for 2-5 hours a day for 2-4 weeks of this sort of thing. These games are 15-30 hours of single player then another 20+ hours of 'with your friends'.
  To say 'dont worry about it' shows a lack of caring in a parent. Of course they should care.
  Remember these are the same people who think they can pull off a double front wheel flip on their bikes because they saw the dude on tv do it (damn that hurt too). They do not have the experience yet to make the judgment of 'hmm that could be a bad idea'.
  My point? As an adult I can say 'huh thats kind of funny', as a child that could be 'hey maybe I could do that'. Not that they think the crap in the game is real. Just that there are some things you want to catch before they try it and show why it is a spectacularly bad idea.
29. Re:The Duke ain't PC by trollertron3000 · 2011-03-22 01:19 · Score: 1
  
  That's the WWIC trend, or "Why Wasn't I Consulted?", where everyone thinks they should have a say in everything. For instance, slashdot. But at least we're smart enough to know we're just bitching and we don't expect the world to change for us.
  
  --
  Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
30. Re:The Duke ain't PC by dunezone · 2011-03-22 01:19 · Score: 1
  
  I would like to just say that when Duke Nukem 3D came out I was 11. I managed to get my hands on the game through some older high school teens. I saw the strippers, killed the fake pig cops, saw the tied up women, saw the Duke defecate down the neck of his enemy. I didn't grow up screwed up or going crazy. I have a college degree and work as a software engineer. But you know who ended up screwed up? My friend who was sheltered from this and kept away from the reality of life. Now he has no job and does drugs, that's reality right there.
31. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 01:22 · Score: 0
  
  Ignore the other AC. Remember, this is Slashdot, where the poster's style of parenting is the One True Path while any deviation renders the parent unfit for raising children. And you better believe that there will be reply posts agreeing with the poster clamoring for the State to take away the "deviant's" children.
32. Re:The Duke ain't PC by erroneus · 2011-03-22 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  Not "politically" correct, but he is "naturally" correct.
  Just look around. We have a mixed up world with mixed up messages. Women want "equality" but they also want the "better treatment" which they believe they deserve by virtue of their gender.
  To be clear, men "harass" one another all the freaking time (sexual or otherwise) and we do worse than that. The problems I could list would go on for a long time so I won't unless prompted to do so. But I will say that "feminism" is sexism for women. So when people stand up and shout "this is sexist!" just remember that the other side of male sexism is feminism and neither are "correct" but one is considered "okay" while the other is demonized.
  I like strip clubs. You know why? It isn't for the nekkid women. It is but it isn't. It's because it's just about the last place a man can go to feel like a natural man. Frankly, I could do without the heavy perfumes and the smoke and crap like that, but the general idea feels good and natural to me and I didn't realize it until I worked for a weekly news paper whose clients include such places. (It was frikken awesome... go there before the lunch rush and get a great lunch and a little less hastle from the nude trick-or-treaters and there you go!)
  And didn't we cover all this political nonsense when all the grand theft auto was the point of controversy? I never cared for that game, but this one I think I will love.
  And damnit! Let me be a man! It's who I am. It's what I was born to be. I have instincts and that's what they say I like. Let me frikken enjoy it even if it's just a damned game.
33. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 01:31 · Score: 0
  
  My nephew was kickin' ass on quake 3 at 3yrs old. He's turned out ok, except for the addiction to gaming he has.....
34. Re:The Duke ain't PC by stewbacca · 2011-03-22 01:33 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, and how exactly can you classify a game as bad satire IF IT'S NOT AVAILABLE YET?
35. Re:The Duke ain't PC by stewbacca · 2011-03-22 01:37 · Score: 1
  
  I'm one of those idiot parents. My kid knows far more evil from television and media OTHER than video games. This won't even measure on his radar. He's terrified of girls because, wait for it...he's an awkward 11 year-old. Some stupid video game isn't going to change that.
36. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 01:38 · Score: 0
  
  I wouldn't. Not that video games aren't suitable for kids, but simply that a 10 year old is unlikely to understand all the satire and sarcasm that is going on in the Duke Nukem games. I know that when me and my friends were teenagers we thought Duke was "totally awesome," and not in the "this is cheesy and over the top way."
  Video Games are fine for 10 year olds. Heck, violent videogames are fine - little Johnny isn't going to go to school and shoot anyone. But Duke Nuken is a particularly adult series. I don't think the game should be banned from being sold to kids or anything, but I'd certainly think twice as a parent before letting my 10 year old play it.
37. Re:The Duke ain't PC by stewbacca · 2011-03-22 02:03 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, the Bobo Doll experiment. That's why games like Grand Theft Auto and Duke Nukem are inappropriate for that age group...THREE to SIX year-olds. But at the next stage of early childhood development, children learn not to beat up the Bobo doll. A pre- or early teen has a far more developed sense of right and wrong than a three year old.
  As for pro wrestling and jackass, well, those guys are funny and I, as a 42 year old, would never try any of that stupid shit. That's why it's funny...because they are so stupid to do it, and I don't have to.
38. Re:The Duke ain't PC by stewbacca · 2011-03-22 02:06 · Score: 1
  
  My kids (14, 11) play Call of Duty non-stop. Based on the other voices in the multiplayer games, I would guess probably the majority of players at any given time are school aged. My kids know it's a game (a fun one at that because you get to shoot people, and when you die, you come back to life...things that aren't possible in real life, thus part of the fun).
39. Re:The Duke ain't PC by stewbacca · 2011-03-22 02:09 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, because all kids fit your perfect age span for expected behavior. My kid is 11 and a boy. He is more mature than his 14 year old brother, at times. Your arbitrary age ratings (and the completely arbitrary ratings of games and movies in general) are stupid, pointless, and miss the mark completely when it comes to parenting children.
  Only stupid people (regardless of age) think they can pull off a double front wheel flip. There's a built in filter for stupid behavior like that called "fear" and "pain".
  And stupid people who imitate media are not limited to a specific age group. They are just stupid in general, regardless of their age.
40. Re:The Duke ain't PC by stewbacca · 2011-03-22 02:11 · Score: 1
  
  It's perfectly legal for macho guy to try and capture babes. I see it every weekend at the bars and clubs.
41. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Sabz5150 · 2011-03-22 02:13 · Score: 1
  
  You forgot: "... who likes punching aliens in the balls."
  
  Who doesn't?
  
  --
  "Who modded this informative? Whoever it is must've been smokin' some of that martian pot!"
42. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Schadrach · 2011-03-22 02:15 · Score: 2
  
  Heh. I thought Duke was juvenile when I *was* a teenager (OMG having a Voodoo was like night and day in Quake!), but it was silly and over the top and an excuse to blow up some aliens.
  I'll still tell you to lighten up, because everyone is too PC about everything. Noone has a right not to be offended.
  I'm kind of a strange beast politically though -- I'm pro choice (but oddly, anti-abortion -- it is a moral decision and should be placed in the hands of the individual woman, not the state; but that doesn't mean I personally *agree* with that choice, it just isn't *my* choice to make on your behalf), a moderate on gun control (we need to balance our fundamental individual right to bear arms against the crime problem, which means we need gun control that is as effective as possible at curtailing criminal use of guns while having minimal impact on legitimate ownership and use), feel strongly about separation of church and state and all that entails (government involvement with religion needs to be faith-agnostic -- if something is opened to religious displays by one faith, then it needs be opened to displays by any faith who desires to do so or to none of them), I think many entitlement programs should be turned into so called "workfare" -- as in you work for the state if you want your $ENTITLEMENT_PROGRAM_CHECK, there's always a park to help pick litter in, or a state desk jockey who could use an assistant, or worst comes to worst allow nonprofits to request workers from the program, I'm pro same-sex marriage (or rather, I think the religious and legal concepts of marriage should be separated entirely, the latter available to all couples regardless of orientation and the state having absolutely no involvement in the former -- what religious rituals you practice and/or who you are willing to practice them for is not a concern of the state), and of course think everyone has gotten way too whiny and PC -- you have a right to freedom of speech, you don't have a right to prevent others from saying things that offend you.
  There needs to be a political party that is socially liberal, generally fiscally conservative, and doesn't fall back into wacko-land like Libertarians seem to with disturbing frequency.
43. Re:The Duke ain't PC by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 02:17 · Score: 1
  
  You do realize that observing a real violent act, watching Pro Wrestling and watching Jackass all are completely different from playing a game where the violence is fictional?
  In the Bobo Doll experiment the child saw an authority figure perform an action that seemed fun. He rightly assumed that if the authority figure was allowed to do that, he was allowed to and thus imitated the act. Anyone who didn't expect him to hit the doll after watching the adult do it would have been an idiot. A game is not an authority figure. Neither is a movie. This "proves" nothing about violent media. The only thing this proved is that a child will imitate an action that an authority figure performed even if it is a violent action. This makes sense due to simple psychology.
  Pro Wrestling, though fake, is very well done and made to look exceptionally real and does not expressly state itself as fake. Not only that, but the children have been rough housing and beating each other up for centuries, this is just a new way to do it. Let's be honest, you can't really blame Wrestling for children rough housing and having fun. You could blame it for the stupidity of hitting each other with chairs, but I like to blame that on parents who allow their children to do it. Again, these are role models that the children look up to and parents are obviously not explaining anything to the kids if they are imitating it to the point of hospitalization. It's kinda the job of the parents to point out "hey, this is fake. They are professionals, don't do this." etc. Not to mention I wouldn't call children horsing around and imitating Wrestling "violent" I would call it children having fun.
  Jackass? Stupid idiots REALLY doing stupid shit and surviving. It's not the same as a fictional story or media. It's simple psychology again, they see this guy who really did this thing which was stupid and all his friends praised him and said he was awesome, they want to do it so they can get the same praise and attention.
  Not a single example you provided proved anything beyond what GP stated. These studies fall in line with simple psychology and gaining admiration and horsing around. They prove nothing about violent media causing violent actions.
44. Re:The Duke ain't PC by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 02:23 · Score: 1
  
  How about a new Redneck Rampage game with a multiplayer game mode 'Capture the Nigger'.
  I would actually find that particularly hilarious if done with the same satirical "yea, we know this is over the top" bent that Duke Nukem has. :)
45. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 02:23 · Score: 0
  
  I guess you don't exactly have a major in psychology. While I'm not a big fan of censorship either, kids are impressionable. Define "believe is reality". I'm sure 10 year old kids don't actually believe that a woman is being harmed whenever you smack their bitch up in this DNF game mode, but it's common logics and Parenting 101 to keep track of what kind of stimuli kids face.
  If you're deeply offended by coarse language, you might want to keep your kids from listening to rap music. If you believe religion will be the downfall of mankind, you might want to keep them out of church. If you believe it's wrong to hit women, you might not want them entertaining themselves by doing just that, virtual or otherwise.
46. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 02:30 · Score: 1
  
  And? Even if they don't, the amount of children who would imitate violence in violent media is abysmally small. The crime rates simply aren't that high, nor are there seemingly enough violent children to reach such a conclusion.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
47. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 02:31 · Score: 0
  
  Then why don't you proceed to show that they're all merely following The Narrative (Go look up the origins of "Political Correctness", you'll find followers of Marx and Engels in the mix and the source of the concept... If it's not part of their "narrative" it's "pollitically incorrect"...) and reveal that they've been pushing a Marxist philosophy onto people slowly in a manner that was believed that people wouldn't notice until it'd been done.
  I was against being "PC" before I found out all about it's origins and what it was about I'd determined to be Pollitically Incorrect and refuse to recognize "PC" in any way, shape, or form.
48. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 02:33 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, I was aware of those studies. Now show me a study that links real-world violence with violent media. Also, tell me why crime rates aren't staggeringly high, despite the fact that many people (children included) are subjected to violent media on a daily basis? Locking people up in a small room and then trying to apply the result to the rest of society is quite a hasty conclusion to jump to.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
49. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 02:36 · Score: 1
  
  kids are impressionable.
  But they're not that 'insane'. Really, I believe the small number of violent people (and children) shows beyond a reasonable doubt that, despite most people being subjected to violent media, most people do not replicate the acts they have seen. Especially if it hurts others.
  
  If you're deeply offended by coarse language, you might want to keep your kids from listening to rap music. If you believe religion will be the downfall of mankind, you might want to keep them out of church. If you believe it's wrong to hit women, you might not want them entertaining themselves by doing just that, virtual or otherwise.
  I wouldn't want to do any of those things. I'd rather portray facts rather than personal opinions to the best of my ability.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
50. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 02:37 · Score: 2
  
  Some? From the looks of it, a grand majority of them can handle it. That's why most of them aren't violent.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
51. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  If it's fun, and you agree that it doesn't harm them, then there should be no problem.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
52. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Mr.+Slippery · 2011-03-22 02:52 · Score: 1
  
  It's like how people don't understand parody and satire.
  What exactly are we satirizing here? I mean, if this is a satire of idiotic greasy-faced misogynistic gamer boys, for whom this is the closest they'll ever come to an actual woman, and who would probably get their ass kicked if they ever actually tried to hit a woman, then maybe -- just maybe -- there might be some lulz hidden deep in the notion of beating up women. I mean, does Duke turn to the "camera" after he punches a woman and say, "Does this get you hot, Poindexter?" or what?
  (Hey, hope I didn't say the wrong thing there about idiotic gamer boys who can't get laid. But, you know, people need to learn to chill.)
  Can you explain the satire? Because from here it seems that, while the strippers in Duke Nukem 3D were maybe kinda funny on a seventh-grade level, violence against non-combatant women as an expected part of gameplay is pretty fscking pathetic.
  
  --
  Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
  You cannot wash away blood with blood
53. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Zenaku · 2011-03-22 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  Man, that franchise has really gone down hill since Happy Rainbow Pony Fair Ground Ride XII.
  
  --
  If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
54. Re:The Duke ain't PC by StuartHankins · 2011-03-22 03:07 · Score: 1
  
  GP's post wasn't intended as a personal affront, but it seems you took it that way. Maybe when you grow older you will feel differently.
  
  Personally, I winced when I saw TFS... one of those "what idiot approved this crap?" moments. Even if someone thought for a moment that this was humorous in some dark way, a night's sleep on it should have resulted in it dying quietly.
55. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Opportunist · 2011-03-22 03:17 · Score: 1
  
  What else do you expect? It's pretty much exactly what had to happen.
  Think about it: You keep a child sheltered and under the cheese cover for his first 18 years of his life. He doesn't get to make any "bad" experiences. He doesn't get to make any experiences at all, he is completely unprepared and unready for what happens next: He suddenly becomes considered an adult, with all obligations and "privileges". And these are also the kinds of parents that then suddenly think their obligations as parents are over and have been fulfilled because while their child was under their "protection" nothing bad happened.
  So you have an 18 year old without any preparation for the real world whatsoever, and suddenly also without any support or protection, neither from his parents nor the law. Who in his sane mind would call that preparing his children for life?
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
56. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Opportunist · 2011-03-22 03:19 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm... I agree. Let's outlaw stripclubs.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
57. Re:The Duke ain't PC by pnuema · 2011-03-22 03:20 · Score: 1
  
  There is a HUGE difference between watching a real life adult hit a real life doll, and clicking a mouse. Yes, children will imitate adult behavior. Watching a video game is not the same as watching a real life adult. You'd be shocked (SHOCKED!) to learn that even a 3 year old can tell you Call of Duty is not real life. My 4 year old has been sitting at my side since he was born, playing games. He's watched CoD MW 1 and 2, Black Ops, Dragon Age, Mass Effect 1 and 2, Minecraft...and yes, he does imitate what he sees me do. He is working on his own house in Minecraft, and loves to run the target range in the Spec Ops section of MW2. Children are smarter than you think they are.
58. Re:The Duke ain't PC by geminidomino · 2011-03-22 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  's post wasn't intended as a personal affront, but it seems you took it that way.
  You think so? He said -- note, he did not imply, but said outright -- that anyone who disagreed with his position is obviously a right-wing bully who was against equal rights.
  As someone who does, in fact, disagree with him (a point I think was patently obvious), would you care to explain to me how that was not a personal affront?
59. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Tetsujin · 2011-03-22 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm... I agree. Let's outlaw stripclubs.
  But if we do that, where's your mom going to get the cash to buy her blow?
  
  --
  Bow-ties are cool.
60. Re:The Duke ain't PC by StuartHankins · 2011-03-22 03:39 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see it anywhere. It's possible that the new Slashdot format has hidden something from me. Can you quote where this was said?
61. Re:The Duke ain't PC by geminidomino · 2011-03-22 03:50 · Score: 1
  
  usually the people who say others need to lighten up have never been on the butt end of the joke and usually are part of the demographic majority who get a tad offended/feel persecuted when society tries to balance out the rights they have always had that other minorities have not i.e religious rights, same-sex marriage, etc.
62. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Dishevel · 2011-03-22 03:52 · Score: 0
  
  Who is this "Noone" that you speak of?
  And ..
  Why does he have the right to be offended?
  
  --
  Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
63. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Raenex · 2011-03-22 04:01 · Score: 1
  
  Because this isn't the easy-going days of gaming (as in the 90's)
  Gaming in the 90s had controversy, too, stuff like Mortal Kombat. In fact, it wasn't even until the early 2000s that you could find swearing or boobs in a game.
64. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Dishevel · 2011-03-22 04:03 · Score: 0
  
  Actually I have seen a serious crapload of comments making reference to geeks, nerds and gamers inability to get laid or come out of the basement.
  As I am sure you have.
  And I have to say that 99% of the time the comments are either ignored or laughed at.
  Can not say that I remember a reply post bitching about how inappropriate it is to make those assumptions.
  So. I would have to say that looking at it with nothing other than the facts that I have at hand.
  Women, Blacks, and Gays are the true pussies of /.
  They can not take any joke and have no ability to see parody.
  All things against them are taken regularly in the worst possible light and no quarter is given to those who try to point that out.
  
  --
  Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
65. Re:The Duke ain't PC by antdude · 2011-03-22 04:17 · Score: 1
  
  HAHAHAHA. You're funny with that comment. :P
  
  --
  Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
66. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 04:23 · Score: 0
  
  So, what you are saying is that Fox news is Maxists? Perhaps by Glen Beck's standards if they didn't double up so much, but in reality I would say Fox News is closer to being Nazi. Still manipulative and evil, but for different reasons.
67. Re:The Duke ain't PC by StuartHankins · 2011-03-22 05:23 · Score: 1
  
  Perhaps you misread "demographic majority" as "democratic majority", I don't know. I don't see anything incendiary in that comment, or anything directly pertaining to politics.
  
  The comment, in my interpretation, basically says "people who are offended at this have some experience with someone close to them (perhaps themselves) being teased/persecuted/discriminated against. These people [who don't understand why this would be hurtful] tend to be offended at other things, such as religious rights and gay marriage."
  
  I could go further to say that people who are more tolerant of others do so with an understanding of the negative effects of intolerance. I think that's insightful.
68. Re:The Duke ain't PC by pclminion · 2011-03-22 05:24 · Score: 1
  
  The amount of children that view/play violent media is likely staggeringly high. How many of them are actually insane enough actually imitate the violence and try it on others? Most of them know that it's fiction.
  Killing aliens and other bad guys who are themselves trying to kill YOU is obviously fiction, and even justifiable under the concept of self-defense. Smacking a woman? Dude, that happens in real life. Some kids who will play this game have fathers who've done it to their mothers. Maybe the kid himself has been smacked. Now the video game shows that this might be okay -- if he hits mom and it's okay, I guess it's okay that he hits me, too. I support free speech and ultimately the right of a game company to produce whatever sort of filth they want, but guess what? I have free speech too. I'm using that freedom to say that this is fucking sick and morally depraved.
  Also, you have no fucking clue how children's minds work. Obviously.
69. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Burning1 · 2011-03-22 06:40 · Score: 1
  
  Personally, I enjoy Duke's politically incorrect sense of humour a great deal. But I say this as someone who has seen domestic abuse, misogyny, and racism in life... As much as people need to chill and stop being ultra PC, we also need to remember that we are having fun with some very sensitive issues for some people.
70. Re:The Duke ain't PC by geminidomino · 2011-03-22 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  I didn't misread a thing.
  You may consider it insightful, but it's also dead wrong. As one of those people who does have experience with "teasing, persecution, and discrimination," being compared to the pricks who do so because instead of being a victim, I cowboyed the fuck up and got the hell over it, is damned surely a goddamn personal slur.
  I can only assume you're reading selectively, though, since "same sex marriage" and "religious rights" are completely off-topic and were only included for the sake of politicizing the insult.
  If that's the case, then there ain't a good goddamn thing anyone's going to do to change your mind so I'll sleep just fine with yet another "freak."
  "Get down off the cross
  Use the wood to build a bridge
  and get over it"
  --My favorite Haiku, courtesy of Chris Titus.
71. Re:The Duke ain't PC by sorak · 2011-03-22 07:58 · Score: 1
  
  What do you mean to say is "not real"? Should a parent sit over the child's shoulder with a constant monologue going?
  
  Violence does not solve problems. We live in a society full of laws, and even in times of war do not punch the enemy in the testicles because it is ineffective and is possibly a violation of the Geneva convention. Also, cops are not always bad. They are a necessary part of society and the situation is far more complicated than the pork and Nazi references make it sound.
  Also, do not kidnap women, and I cannot stress this next part enough, never rape a woman, not even if she's a "babe". Do it once and she'll never forgive you. Believe me, I once straddled your mom when she was asleep and she hasn't stopped bitching about it since...
72. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 10:24 · Score: 1
  
  What do you mean to say is "not real"?
  Exactly what it means. The video game is not reality. It is fiction.
  
  Should a parent sit over the child's shoulder with a constant monologue going?
  The discussion need only happen once, as far as I know.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
73. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 10:34 · Score: 1
  
  Killing aliens and other bad guys who are themselves trying to kill YOU is obviously fiction, and even justifiable under the concept of self-defense.
  When I was a child, I knew it was fiction instantly because I was controlling a character in a video game. Even for a child, this is not difficult to figure out. They may wish it was real, but very, very few believe that it really is real. And, as I said before, if the child is one of the few who needs to be told that it's not real, the parent can do exactly that. Unless they're not good parents, of course. There is no need for censoring/banning in place of actual education. I believe that the former are tools used by imbeciles.
  
  Dude, that happens in real life.
  So does murder and shooting. Yet, surprisingly, 'sane' people, even children, don't take this seriously because it's just a game. They still believe that it's 'bad' when it happens to real people, most likely. Again, where is the statistical evidence that shows otherwise? Our crime rates aren't nearly as high as you'd expect (not even the number of violent youths).
  
  Also, you have no fucking clue how children's minds work. Obviously.
  Can children be educated? How many of them believe that video games are reality? How many of them would continue believing such even if a trusted parental figure told them otherwise and educated them about how it is not real? I suspect the number is very, very slim.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
74. Re:The Duke ain't PC by pclminion · 2011-03-22 11:30 · Score: 1
  
  And, as I said before, if the child is one of the few who needs to be told that it's not real, the parent can do exactly that. Unless they're not good parents, of course.
  It's the case with bad parents that is the problem. I'd really like you to address my main argument. Say you're a ten year old kid whose dad beats both you and your mom. You pick up this game, which seems to include woman-beating as a theme. What sort of thought processes do you think will go through this kid's mind? If you're a kid who gets beat, well, you live to get beat another day. If you're a kid who gets shot, well, you're dead.
  I'm not worried about the crime -- as if this is going to cause the kid to go out and start beating people, that's ridiculous. But you've gotta be seriously blind if you think that sort of thing is not going to fuck up that kid's head in a major way.
75. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 11:35 · Score: 1
  
  What sort of thought processes do you think will go through this kid's mind?
  Never been in that situation, so I don't know. Neither do you. However, even if what you are saying is true, so what? This, again, applies to a select minority of the population. Even the abused likely wouldn't be idiotic enough to believe games were real or that they had a place in reality.
  
  But you've gotta be seriously blind if you think that sort of thing is not going to fuck up that kid's head in a major way.
  If this happens, it happens to an abysmally small minority of the population who could already be considered 'mentally ill' in the first place. Yes, it's unfortunate that it might (although I still doubt that an abused person, child or not, would look to video games to reach conclusions about what is 'right' or 'wrong' since they're not necessarily complete imbeciles) happen, but I'm not going to censor or ban entertaining things to appease a few people, nor will I support such behavior.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
76. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Ocker3 · 2011-03-22 12:38 · Score: 1
  
  in the balls nothing, what happened to "I'm going to rip off your head and shit down your neck"???
77. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 15:47 · Score: 0
  
  How can any decent human being enjoy playing that? Assaulting a struggling woman? Hitting her?
  I love video games, but why do we need to go here? Why do I have to see shit like this just to play?
  Women are 25-40% of gamers however you look at the number, from Halo and Xbox to WoW. Why do we have to live with this abuse?
78. Re:The Duke ain't PC by sorak · 2011-03-22 16:04 · Score: 1
  
  What do you mean to say is "not real"?
  Exactly what it means. The video game is not reality. It is fiction.
  I don't think that anybody is assuming that Duke Nukem is a real person. My point is that there are several subtle messages that go beyond "don't shoot alien pigs". This man, if he were real is a psychotherapists wet dream. Trying to analyze everything that is wrong with him, from his disrespect for women, to the disrespect for civilized society, to the anger and aggression issues, is far beyond the capabilities of most parents.
  
  Should a parent sit over the child's shoulder with a constant monologue going?
  The discussion need only happen once, as far as I know.
  No, it doesn't work like that. You ever follow politics? There is a reason politicians come up with catch phrases and repeat them over and over. Advertisers come up with slogans and repeat them for the same reason; repetition works. I just wrote that comment 6 hours ago and can't remember all of it. I imagine that neither of us will remember it six months from now. If you want to compete with a bad idea that is constantly reinforced, then you will need to stay vigilant. You would need to keep making constant reminders that being a cynical asshole who treats women like meat is not cool (even if fifteen year-olds think differently), and you would somehow seem more cool than the video game character (hard to do when you're the 35 year-old who punishes him for not eating his vegetables).
79. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 16:28 · Score: 1
  
  Trying to analyze everything that is wrong with him
  "Wrong" is subjective.
  
  No, it doesn't work like that.
  It doesn't? I seem to be able to remember that video games aren't real. I remembered it even as a child (though my parents didn't need to tell me such an obvious thing).
  
  repetition works.
  On some people. Perhaps most? It doesn't work on me, anyway. And I've never heard of an instance where a video game influenced someone to such a great degree. Perhaps it's only an abysmally small minority of the population?
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
80. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Lythn · 2011-03-22 16:48 · Score: 1
  
  It's not parody when it's too close to the truth and past experiences. Men don't understand why rape jokes aren't funny, because they don't understand how common rape and violence are. We do, because we've had our own horrific moments and close calls, and we've stood by our friends in theirs. Sex and violence mix too much in real life already. Video games should be an escape, a vacation from the real world.
81. Re:The Duke ain't PC by dmauer · 2011-03-22 17:08 · Score: 1
  
  Beautifully put.
  
  --
  === "Some people see the glass as half-empty. Others see it as half-full. I see the glass as too big." -G. Carlin.
82. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Adam+Jorgensen · 2011-03-22 20:20 · Score: 1
  
  Thing is, I'm not PC, not at all.
  What I am is anti-stupid,
  It's a losing battle ;-)
83. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Ailure · 2011-03-22 21:55 · Score: 1
  
  Huh, I recall it was easily worse during the 90's, especially worldwide (it's must been over a decade since I last remember a controversy where I live in Sweden). In fact, I can't recall any recent media frenzy, especially after Jack Thompson lost his credibility even amongst the "think of the children" groups.
  The last notable media frenzy was easily the hot coffee controversy, and as far I can tell that was US-centric controversy.
  Games tend to self-censor themselves a lot. You rarely see children in games for example, I think the only FPS you can kill them in is in Deus Ex and that game is a lot about moral choices anyway. Well, and that you can "kill" the little sisters in Bioshock but that's discouraged, and the game rewards your for rescuing them.
84. Re:The Duke ain't PC by rikkards · 2011-03-22 22:06 · Score: 1
  
  Wow, I didn't think that comment would get so much of a response. It wasn't so much a politicizing as an observation I have had of a typical whitebread christian. They will make jokes about fags and the ragheads and when someone calls them out about it they dismiss it as a joke when you can tell perfectly well that it wasn't. Also the complaints around Happy Holidays vs Merry Christmas and how Christians are now being persecuted in North America. I laugh at that one
  If I offended someone in the way I wrote it I apologize. If you are one of the people the above describes, my statement stands.
85. Re:The Duke ain't PC by pclminion · 2011-03-23 03:56 · Score: 1
  
  I already said, quite clearly, that I don't want to ban things. Given that you couldn't have possibly missed that, it appears you're just trying to criticize me for exercising my right to express my own viewpoint, which is that this shit is unbelievably sick.
86. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-23 08:07 · Score: 0
  
  Then apparently you just want to bitch and moan, to which my answer is simple: Shut the fuck up and go away. Nobody cares.
87. Re:The Duke ain't PC by pclminion · 2011-03-23 08:31 · Score: 1
  
  "Shut the fuck up" -- what a committed proponent of free speech you are.
88. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-23 08:38 · Score: 0
  
  I'm exercising my right to free speech by telling you to shut the fuck up.
89. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Dishevel · 2011-03-23 08:45 · Score: 0
  
  Actually I think in order to be a good parody it must be close to the truth of what it is a parody of.
  Otherwise if there is no close connection between the two it would just be a thing in and of itself and not a parody of something.
  So to correct your statement let me say that "Only if it is close to the truth" can it be called a parody at all.
  
  --
  Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
90. Re:The Duke ain't PC by geminidomino · 2011-03-23 08:54 · Score: 1
  
  If I offended someone in the way I wrote it I apologize
  Then I similarly apologize for my vitriolic response.
91. Re:The Duke ain't PC by pweidema · 2011-03-23 09:03 · Score: 1
  
  yeah it's wonderful that we no longer have to worry about violence against women (An estimated 1.3 million women are victims of physical assault by an intimate partner each year)http://www.ncadv.org/files/DomesticViolenceFactSheet(National).pdf At last I can laugh!
92. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-23 09:25 · Score: 1
  
  No. I meant the parents. I wasn't speaking to you specifically. Sorry about that. If you're just talking about it, that's fine. It only becomes a problem when someone tries to enact laws to ban/censor things for completely idiotic reasons (which you already said you didn't want).
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
93. Re:The Duke ain't PC by mattack2 · 2011-03-23 13:14 · Score: 1
  
  Wait, was all of this covered "when all the grand theft auto was the point of controversy"?
  I thought the mostly-but-not-completely removed sex scenes were the big issue that got into the press... not the
  1) fact that there are hookers in the game
  2) availing yourself of hookers restores your health
  3) you can kill the hookers afterwards to get your health back...
  DId that kind of issue make it into the press?
94. Re:The Duke ain't PC by sorak · 2011-03-24 01:34 · Score: 1
  
  Trying to analyze everything that is wrong with him
  "Wrong" is subjective.
  Ahh...moral relativism...As a parent, there are some behaviors I want to encourage in my children and some I do not.
  
  No, it doesn't work like that.
  It doesn't? I seem to be able to remember that video games aren't real. I remembered it even as a child (though my parents didn't need to tell me such an obvious thing).
  The game isn't real, but the attitudes of the developers are. The attitudes of the people who play those games are real.
  
  repetition works.
  On some people. Perhaps most? It doesn't work on me, anyway.
  Are you sure?
  
  And I've never heard of an instance where a video game influenced someone to such a great degree.
  How great a degree? I never said the game would turn children into rapists, or anything like that. My argument is that a game where the hero rapes women may cause young children to believe that sexism is ok.
  Seeing an extremist often makes a moderate view seem more reasonable. The Simpsons, for example, was controversial when it first came out. Part of the reason that isn't true today is because Beavis And Butthead, Family Guy, South Park, etc shifted the middle toward that direction.
  
  Perhaps it's only an abysmally small minority of the population?
  Or perhaps it is a small effect.
95. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-24 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  Ahh...moral relativism...As a parent, there are some behaviors I want to encourage in my children and some I do not.
  Okay, but I suggest not stating it as a fact. That would be misleading.
  
  The game isn't real, but the attitudes of the developers are. The attitudes of the people who play those games are real.
  Yes, and? Someone who makes or plays a brutally violent game isn't necessarily violent. I'd be willing to bet that, more often than not, they aren't violent.
  
  Are you sure?
  I don't believe you can be sure on anything. However, countless things have been repeated to me that I still do not believe. Loss of potential future gain equals harm, violent media makes people violent, etc.
  
  My argument is that a game where the hero rapes women may cause young children to believe that sexism is ok.
  That's quite a great degree. I've never seen or heard of this, either. In any case, I'd call that person "insane" for letting themselves and their opinions be so greatly influenced by a mere game, child or not. Even most of them know better (and, if they don't, the parent can tell them otherwise).
  
  Or perhaps it is a small effect.
  Such a small effect that it can't be noticed? Either way, it is irrelevant and there is nothing to worry about, as far as I see.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
96. Re:The Duke ain't PC by sorak · 2011-03-25 05:48 · Score: 1
  
  I think you are not giving the subconscious mind enough credit, but here are a couple of citations to show that people can be influenced by small things.
  How an issue is framed can influence how an individual approaches a problem. I would suggest that children are more impressionable than the people in this study, and would be more likely to be swayed.
  But to be honest, I wasn't convinced by research. I just grew up around boys who imitated Beavis and Butthead and girls who mindlessly followed every fashion trend of the day. I know it is anecdotal, but seeing how teens and people in their twenties openly imitate the people they see on TV, I see nothing "crazy" or implausible about the idea that a small child would emulate the attitudes of characters he sees in games or in TV. Again, when I say "emulate", I don't mean "rape women". I mean that he will be more likely to treat them as objects than someone who has never been exposed to that attitude.
  But, just to make it clear. I don't really care if you play the game. If I had the free time, I would probably play it myself. I choose not to expose my son to that, because I feel that the characters he sees on TV are role models that I will have to compete with, even if they are nothing more than cartoon trains that like to read stories, or muscle-heads who like to punch people in the balls. When he's a teenager, I'll let him play whatever he wants (although we may have an unspoken agreement that the porn stays hidden), but not until then.
97. Re:The Duke ain't PC by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-25 12:21 · Score: 1
  
  Plenty of children play video games. Yet most of them don't appear to think that murder, rape, or violence is okay, from what I've seen. I certainly don't, and I played video games since I was a child (at five).Violent ones. As far as I'm concerned, the effect is nonexistent.
  
  I just grew up around boys who imitated Beavis and Butthead and girls who mindlessly followed every fashion trend of the day.
  
  Imitating harmless things is quite different than being so heavily influenced by media that you believe that abuse is okay simply because of it.
  
  implausible about the idea that a small child would emulate the attitudes of characters he sees in games or in TV.
  I've never seen it happen. Again, the few that succumb to this can just be told by their parents that the media is not real and it's not intelligent to be so easily influenced by it.
  There is no reason to censor it for the child and keep them in a bubble.
  
  I mean that he will be more likely to treat them as objects than someone who has never been exposed to that attitude.
  I'm not going to worry about the few people who act this way. It's certainly no excuse to censor everything for a child, as far as I see.
  
  When he's a teenager, I'll let him play whatever he wants
  You just said that the teenagers you met did the very said thing (imitating). Why the change of heart? He will clearly be influenced by a video game despite knowing that they aren't real, right?
  
  although we may have an unspoken agreement that the porn stays hidden
  Why is that?
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
98. Re:The Duke ain't PC by Viceice · 2011-03-28 16:27 · Score: 1
  
  So I guess you're one of those who also think Russell Peters is racist.
  
  --
  Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
Finally! by QuantumG · 2011-03-21 18:05 · Score: 0

This seems relevant: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2010/8/11/
If you don't understand why: http://webcomicoverlook.com/2010/08/17/penny-arcade-and-jokes-about-rape/
Apparently few made the connection to: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Dick%20Wolf

--
How we know is more important than what we know.
1. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 19:59 · Score: 1
  
  In the dickwolves controversy, the whole point of that joke was that rape was a bad thing, they simply used that to emphasise how dickish it was for the guy to leave them there to be raped. In this game, you are actively hitting a woman for refusing to let you, effectively, kidnap her. The game isn't showing someone else doing it so you can beat them down, this is an encouraged, rewarded gameplay action. Not the same.
2. Re:Finally! by emj · 2011-03-21 21:14 · Score: 0
  
  Actually the whole point was that Penny-Arcade made things worse, first they make jokes about rape and then they choose to belittle the people who protested about it. I agree that the DNF thingy really sucks, that doesn't make rape more or less ok.
3. Re:Finally! by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-21 23:12 · Score: 1
  
  Yes. They made jokes about rape. Why should anyone care? As far as I know, only the people deemed 'insane' by society would be affected by such jokes so much that they would view rape as more 'okay' because of them. As far as I know, no one really believes that rape is okay just because someone (or themselves) make a few jokes about it. Many people murder others in video games for their own entertainment. Does this mean that if they murdered someone in real life they would feel the same way? Most likely not (not that they would even do that in the first place). They're fictional characters.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
4. Re:Finally! by Mr.+Slippery · 2011-03-22 03:29 · Score: 1
  
  They made jokes about rape. Why should anyone care? As far as I know, only the people deemed 'insane' by society would be affected by such jokes so much that they would view rape as more 'okay' because of them. As far as I know, no one really believes that rape is okay just because someone (or themselves) make a few jokes about it.
  I'm sorry to let you in on this, but human beings don't work that way.
  It's not the case that there's some bright line where sane people all understand that rape is always 100% wrong and only a handful of people with seriously broken brains would ever think otherwise. There are a lot of people in a grey area, who can be pushed one way or the other. It's why, for example, rape is routinely used as a tool of war: you can take an otherwise sane soldier, expose him to concentrated toxic memes, and create a rapist.
  Similarly, you can take some gamer kid who does not believe that violence against women is ok, expose him to media that normalize beating up women, and create a batterer.
  Will it be common? No, because that's one influence among many. Should we use force to silence odious media that normalize violent behavior? No. Should intelligent, thoughtful people who give a damn say "this is over the line, and we're going to criticize it"? Yes.
  
  --
  Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
  You cannot wash away blood with blood
5. Re:Finally! by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 10:22 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sorry to let you in on this, but human beings don't work that way.
  I know. I don't care. I'm not going to let what appears to be an abysmally small number of idiots ruin freedom of speech/expression.
  
  There are a lot of people in a grey area, who can be pushed one way or the other.
  Where? Who are these people? Many humans are likely imbeciles, but I believe that most of them do think that rape is 'bad'.
  
  Similarly, you can take some gamer kid who does not believe that violence against women is ok, expose him to media that normalize beating up women, and create a batterer.
  Ah, but they won't turn into murderers by playing Grand Theft Auto? This, for some reason, only applies to rapists?
  
  Will it be common? No, because that's one influence among many.
  Then I don't care. Most people will be fine (even if they aren't very intelligent). If a few people abuse something, then that is not the fault of the media/object. It is their own fault. If everything were to be censored/banned because a few people could, theoretically, abuse it, then that would happen to nearly everything.
  
  Should intelligent, thoughtful people who give a damn say "this is over the line, and we're going to criticize it"? Yes.
  I disagree. I think these "intelligent, thoughtful people" that you mention are making a big deal out of an abysmally small portion of the population.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
When she freaks out by countertrolling · 2011-03-21 18:06 · Score: 1

you know the <routine>

--
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
(Disclaimer: I'm from the Middle East) by gcnaddict · 2011-03-21 18:17 · Score: 1

So, we're allowed to be politically incorrect?

I wonder how much they would make by launching DNF in Arab League states.

--
Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
1. Re:(Disclaimer: I'm from the Middle East) by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 23:11 · Score: 0
  
  So, we're allowed to be politically incorrect?
  Yes.
  Or at least anywhere this game is going to be released. If it's not PC, then add a rating onto it to "Protect the Children (TM)". As an adult you have a choice. If you are offended then don't buy it, if you aren't then do what you want..
  There are some things that are morally wrong in this world, that many people can agree on. There are others that are not, even though some people consider them to be. Hitting another person for shits and giggles is wrong as it hurts someone who hasn't done anything to you. Making a computer game in which the character you play hits someone for the same reason is not. It doesn't hurt anyone, or affect anyone else in any way. Some people may be offended by it, but that does not make it wrong.
2. Re:(Disclaimer: I'm from the Middle East) by sabt-pestnu · 2011-03-22 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  Sure! I'm sure they could swap models and put the Babe in a Burqa....
Here we go again by LS · 2011-03-21 18:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

So why is beating and killing prostitutes in GTA ok, but this some kind of travesty?

--
There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
1. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 18:31 · Score: 0
  
  No one wants to talk about or defend prostitutes (yay western ideals).
2. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 18:34 · Score: 0
  
  Because that stupid guy who took on rockstar was a sexist pig and thought the only evil thing was killing cops and "paying for sex" but not killing ppl, prostitutes or "bad guys who have it coming". It's a double standard but it really is just a government of your own doing.
  You ppl have guns, right? Use 'em.
3. Re:Here we go again by L4t3r4lu5 · 2011-03-21 21:11 · Score: 1
  
  Rockstar North (responsible for the GTA franchise) are based in Scotland. Over this side of the Atlantic, we can appreciate satire. I don't see a lot of it in the American shows televised here (although admittedly I don't watch many). Could be that.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
4. Re:Here we go again by FrootLoops · 2011-03-21 22:32 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  In my experience (as an American) American perspectives vary wildly. Check out South Park or Family Guy; they're American shows that involve heavy satire. They're very popular with certain demographics, but they're hated, often vehemently, by other segments of the population. I think it would be more accurate to say there's a large, often vocal, conservative block in our population that doesn't appreciate satire. [Of course even this refinement is a generalization and isn't strictly true.]
  
  As for me, I couldn't care less about the DKF multiplayer "controversy". It seems inconsistent to only get upset about hitting a woman/carrying her as a flag when the game is about killing people.
5. Re:Here we go again by L4t3r4lu5 · 2011-03-21 22:49 · Score: 1
  
  It all comes down to "Squeaky wheel gets the oil."
  
  Small clarification; The game is about killing aliens, not people.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
6. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 23:06 · Score: 0
  
  Isn't South Park made in Canada?
7. Re:Here we go again by WhirlwindMonk · 2011-03-21 23:08 · Score: 1
  
  I think it would be more accurate to say there's a large, often vocal, conservative block in our population that doesn't appreciate satire. [Of course even this refinement is a generalization and isn't strictly true.]
  In my experience, there are several, very vocal groups on both sides of the political isle who don't appreciate satire of specific kinds. Make gay jokes or racist jokes? The only thing that keeps the left-wing groups off your throat is if you're a minority. Crack a joke about Christianity? The right-wing groups will be in your face instantly. But both seem to approve of the humor the opposite side hates, telling each other to "lighten up," or in the worst cases, that their own humor is justified because it's true. I feel that the vast majority of people do enjoy satire, it's just different people enjoy different types. Personally, I find both Family Guy and South Park to be rather dull most of the time (the Manbearpig episode was pretty fantastic, though). Any funny satire they do tends to be ruined for me by the body and shock humor ("WE SAID PENIS, LOL"). Yu-Gi-Oh Abridged on the other hand, I just about die laughing at every episode. It's just different tastes.
8. Re:Here we go again by theantipop · 2011-03-22 00:32 · Score: 1
  
  Because this game comes out soon. Just wait for the next GTA game to near release and you'll hear all about it again.
9. Re:Here we go again by makomk · 2011-03-22 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  It probably isn't, but at least in GTA you're clearly a bad guy. In DNF, however, you're supposed to be the good guys - except you're a good guy who who kidnaps women and then beats them when they object, like they're just property to be fought over and won and their own wishes doesn't matter. Even that wouldn't be quite so bad if it wasn't for the fact that this particular attitude to women has a long and unpleasant history, not to mention an awful lot of power.
10. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 01:32 · Score: 0
  
  In GTA it was optional, the point was the game was trying to give something of a sandbox feeling, it wasn't a game objective - the player had a choice to do something, and some people chose to do the bad thing. Here, the whole point of the game is to kidnap the woman and beat her into submission if she struggles, you have to do so to win the game. There is a huge difference between a game that allows you to make your own moral choices and a game that forces you down a questionable moral path.
11. Re:Here we go again by stewbacca · 2011-03-22 02:13 · Score: 1
  
  Because you get your money back by killing the prostitute, duh.
12. Re:Here we go again by stewbacca · 2011-03-22 02:17 · Score: 1
  
  I hope you are joking.
13. Re:Here we go again by Phoobarnvaz · 2011-03-22 03:02 · Score: 0
  
  I think it would be more accurate to say there's a large, often vocal, conservative block in our population that doesn't appreciate satire. [Of course even this refinement is a generalization and isn't strictly true.]
  First of all...I wouldn't call this a generalization and untrue at all. The reason is three-fold:
  
  1. They believe a book about one failed nation is the only book you ever need to understand the universe and everything about it in all it is about.
  2. They don't understand satire of any type.
  3. When you and everyone you will associate with believes they all are "legends in their own minds"...your world is a big/bad place where you have no business dictating anything about it at all. For that matter...you can't even have a coherent thought worth thinking.
  
  --
  Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia. - Charles M. Schulz
14. Re:Here we go again by socrplayr813 · 2011-03-22 03:12 · Score: 1
  
  As FrootLoops said, perspectives vary wildly. The (often Christian) conservative groups are what generally make noise about these things, but they are not nearly as large in number as they appear. They're just far more vocal. The younger generations and more liberal folks tend to appreciate satire more and often take themselves far less seriously.
  One thing that I think people often forget (or never knew) is just how varied the population of the US is. The country is much, much larger (both geographically and in population) than most other countries in the world, which leads to quite a bit of variation in culture from place to place. Add in the 'melting pot' factor and you start getting a giant, jumbled mess of different beliefs and ways of approaching things as you travel around the country. More densely populated and/or educated areas tend to be more liberal, while rural areas are generally conservative. Suburbs vary wildly.
  It also seems to me like we get a good bit more attention about stupid things like this than other parts of the globe, though that depends on perspective and exactly what media you're exposed to.
  As for myself, and the people I prefer to associate with, we don't typically go for this over-the-top entertainment (though I may buy Duke just because he's freakin' Duke), but we would never seek to control what other people like or do. It seems like the US is turning into a 'freedom and liberty for all, as long as you agree with the vocal minority' environment.
  
  --
  The confidence of ignorance will always overcome the indecision of knowledge.
15. Re:Here we go again by FrootLoops · 2011-03-22 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  I would still call my statement an untrue generalization in the strict sense--certainly some Americans who don't appreciate satire are not (possibly vocal) conservatives. Even classifying people in such generalized categories is problematic: what is a conservative, and what does it mean to be a vocal one? What does it mean to appreciate satire? Must you like all satire, even that which would deeply offend nearly everyone (think eating babies)? Is it in fact satire itself these people don't like, or its execution in specific instances--for instance, could they like Voltaire's Candide and hate South Park? Putting people into such large categories should be done cautiously as I believe history has shown. So, I marked my statement as a generalization to be taken with a grain of salt.
  
  That said, I imagine my statement is "mostly true", whatever that means. Language is wonderful--we can express remarkably vague notions with it. Hopefully these vague notions have "content".
16. Re:Here we go again by Tetsujin · 2011-03-22 03:39 · Score: 1
  
  You clearly don't know what you're talking aboot, buddy.
  
  --
  Bow-ties are cool.
17. Re:Here we go again by Demonantis · 2011-03-22 05:22 · Score: 1
  
  America is a funny place.
18. Re:Here we go again by Rogerborg · 2011-03-22 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  The game is about killing aliens, not people.
  Ten Starfleet Demerits. You're going to be haunted by Gene Roddenberry's ghost for that one.
  
  --
  If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
19. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 15:16 · Score: 0
  
  So why is beating and killing prostitutes in GTA ok, but this some kind of travesty?
  Because in GTA you did that to everyone. And the shit hit the fan when you could only hot-coffee the prostitutes. Had you been able to seduce everyone, it wouldn't have been as big a deal.
20. Re:Here we go again by Lythn · 2011-03-22 15:54 · Score: 1
  
  Who the hell said it was okay? However, beating prostitutes is not the *point* of GTA. The goal of this level is to kidnap and assault a struggling, innocent bystander.
21. Re:Here we go again by FrootLoops · 2011-03-22 16:26 · Score: 1
  
  Haha, thanks for that. Good laugh!
22. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-24 04:48 · Score: 0
  
  For some reason, violence in movies and other media has gained way more acceptance than anything. PG-13 movies very often have tons of people getting shot and killed, but OMG, PROTECT THE CHILDREN, YOU CAN'T LET THEM SEE THE TITTIES!
  In this case, we're talking about someone slapping a woman, which means misogyny, which hitting is a politically sensitive nerve. It's going to spark way more outrage than any ultra violent and gory video game ever does.
THE PROOF by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 18:26 · Score: 1

The actual phrase goes "The proof of the pudding is in the eating."
Sexists and idiots, who would've thunk it??
1. Re:THE PROOF by dingen · 2011-03-21 23:51 · Score: 1
  
  And the correct shorthand (albeit quite meaningless) is "the proof of the pudding", not "the proof is in the pudding".
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
Publicity by akkornel · 2011-03-21 18:35 · Score: 1

At this point, it doesn't matter how much hate/love/controvery/whatever this brings: It brings publicity, and that's the point!
1. Re:Publicity by bronney · 2011-03-21 19:21 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think it needs publicity at this point.. If someone play games and don't know what DNF is, you can collect his game card :)
Equally Smackable by optymizer · 2011-03-21 18:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

If you had to capture a guy and smack him, nobody would have said anything. In that case, Gearbox might even be blamed for not making the option of smacking a woman. So much for gender equality...
1. Re:Equally Smackable by emj · 2011-03-21 22:37 · Score: 1
  
  No in that case people would be protesting, saying that Duke should not be gay. Please! You make no sense, you can't use a theoretical situation to make a point in a very specific situation.
2. Re:Equally Smackable by Broken+scope · 2011-03-22 00:32 · Score: 1
  
  The first half of your statement is correct. The second half is not. The only people who would complain about not getting to hit a woman are some kids on 4chan and a few video game hipsters on kotaku.
  The reason no one says anything about a guy getting smacked, beyond those who complain about anyone getting hit, is that their isn't a culture of acceptance and normalization around violence( and objectification) against men the way there is towards women.
  This culture exists regardless of the number of men who "won't hit girls", though many of these men won't hit "girls", not because hitting someone is generally wrong but because you don't hit "girls" because you don't hit "girls". The reasoning in of itself is sexist. There are plenty non sexist lines of reasoning to use mostly due to the fact it's never going to even be a fair fight.
  Oh and lets not for get that man men who "Don't hit girls", have no problems using their size and strength to coerce, control, and intimidate women into doing things
  
  --
  You mad
3. Re:Equally Smackable by delinear · 2011-03-22 01:35 · Score: 1
  
  So you just make it "capture the president" or something. Of course, then you switch the argument from sexism to racism.
4. Re:Equally Smackable by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 02:41 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, there is a very large culture of acceptance and normalization around violence by women against men, it is, in fact, more tolerated and ignored that male violence against women :)
5. Re:Equally Smackable by makomk · 2011-03-22 02:48 · Score: 2
  
  The reason no one says anything about a guy getting smacked, beyond those who complain about anyone getting hit, is that their isn't a culture of acceptance and normalization around violence( and objectification) against men the way there is towards women.
  Am I the only one that spotted the slight, eensy-weensy contradiction in that sentence? If "no one says anything about a guy getting smacked", that's very much a culture of acceptance and normalization of violence against men. Y'know, the one you were saying didn't exist as justification for continuing to accept and normalize violence against men.
6. Re:Equally Smackable by dmauer · 2011-03-22 17:01 · Score: 1
  
  Spoken like a true ignoramus.
  Look, like everyone else I haven't seen the game, so standard disclaimers apply.
  But: Context matters. There's not exactly an epidemic of the subjugation of men by women in the world. Whereas there are large numbers of people even in the US who think women should be subservient to men (hell, it says so in the Bible!) and generally treat women more like property than like people.
  The "damsel in distress" canard is about as deeply ingrained a theme as exists in entertainment, and its prevalence is indicative of widespread sexism to begin with (not to say that each instance of it is sexist, but for girls who play video games, it's still a novelty to see a female character who doesn't have to be rescued by a man... And extremely rare to see a female character actually rescuing a male.)
  That said, on it's surface, this sounds much nastier than a damsel in distress. Usually the damsel at least is assumed to be an actual person whose freedom is in itself worth fighting for. "Capture the Babe", though? First, this is a "take the other guy's sexy chick" thing, which grants zero agency to the woman - whoever takes her gets to have her. Which is already pretty typically misogynist even before you get to the hysterics and the slapping, which are respectively a negative stereotype and a tacit acceptance of violence against a woman who I presume doesn't fight back.
  And to the people calling it "satire"? Satire condemns its target, usually by presenting an exaggeration of that target. Unless the audience of primarily young men is expected to take this game as a satirical commentary on how accepted various sexist constructs are in video games, I don't see how you look at this and think "Satire."
  Do I think it's going to make people act violently toward women? No, but it will reinforce some negative attitudes toward women that are already prevalent in society, and any girls who are playing the game will have just another example of how people like them are just there to be claimed by the Big Men.
  Sigh.
  
  --
  === "Some people see the glass as half-empty. Others see it as half-full. I see the glass as too big." -G. Carlin.
7. Re:Equally Smackable by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 18:55 · Score: 0
  
  But no one would ever make a game where you have to capture a guy. That would be boring............Oops.
8. Re:Equally Smackable by Broken+scope · 2011-03-23 16:30 · Score: 1
  
  You missed part of my statement, which I could have phrased better, "In the same way"
  Our culture has normalized violence. Generally however, violence against women is different from violence against men.
  Most domestic violence advocates will readily admit that violence committed against men is a problem. However, most of them will also say that violence against women is a significantly larger problem. A problem that generally requires more external resources and intervention.
  Violence against men rarely has a sexual component. Women rarely attack men who refuse to have sex with them. If a man were to reject a woman advances, generally he would not need to fear for his safety the way some women would.
  Men rarely get harassed on the street the way many women experience everyday.
  You also ignored the And I used. It's rather important because objectification is very integral to the discussion.
  Lets not forget the language surrounding violence. The frequent usage of phrases like "asking for it" and excuses like "she was dressed in a provocative manner ("slutty" this word is a conversation in itself).
  However violence against men not being taken seriously as a problem is just another example of how the patriarchy hurts everybody.
  
  --
  You mad
9. Re:Equally Smackable by ReverendDG · 2011-03-24 21:27 · Score: -1
  
  the reason culture is like that is just the same reason as it has been forever. a man who hits women is looked at as weak, since he is hitting someone who is weaker than them(note that men are on average stronger than women) same with hitting kids, it is taboo because it makes the man look weak to others. at least that seems to be the real reason, other than say not causing others pain..
10. Re:Equally Smackable by makomk · 2011-03-25 00:59 · Score: 1
  
  You missed part of my statement, which I could have phrased better, "In the same way"
  Of course it's not in the same way. Why would you expect it to be?
  There is though - for example - a huge amount of similarity in the way domestic violence is dismissed and justified regardless of gender. Same victim-blaming assumptions that the victim "must've done something to deserve it", the same reasons why so many victims put up with it and try and justify their abuser's actions, the same risk that kids will also be harmed... There are some diffferences, but not the ones you want. When the abuse has a female perpetrator and a male victim, all the anti-domestic violence organisations, the police and many feminists join in the victim-blaming chorus. Arresting male victims is seen as normal in a way that would be seen as unacceptable if they were female. Abused men in heterosexual relationships with kids also have an additional incentive to remain that women don't: if they leave, the abuser is almost certain to get primary or sole custody of the kids. And so on.
  (Of course, that's only one kind of violence against men. What's probably more relevant here is the way our society treats men as disposable, in particular the way male soldiers are sent away to die en-masse in often pointless wars, and how the treatment of characters and NPCs. This remains true even now that women can serve - it's not a coincidence that the Private Jessica Lynch propaganda piece involved a female soldier, it wouldn't have been as effective with a male one.)
  
  Most domestic violence advocates will readily admit that violence committed against men is a problem. However, most of them will also say that violence against women is a significantly larger problem. A problem that generally requires more external resources and intervention.
  I've sort of noticed this. They consider hypothetical violence against hypothetical men a problem, but as soon as actual violence against an actual man happens they break out the victim-blaming and trivialisation.
  
  Violence against men rarely has a sexual component. Women rarely attack men who refuse to have sex with them.
  According to statistics that very nearly define "rape" as something a man can't possibly do to a women, yes. Seriously, every time I've seen someone try to "prove" this it's been with studies structured to oughtright discount most female-perpetrated rape and a lot of male rape victims in a way they don't male-on-female rape. (Not that it's easy to compare the two in the first place; current gender roles don't exactly provide a way for men to say "no" in the first place, especially to someone they're in a relationship with, and make emotional abuse a highly effective way for women to coerce men into having sex.)
  
  Lets not forget the language surrounding violence. The frequent usage of phrases like "asking for it" and excuses like "she was dressed in a provocative manner ("slutty" this word is a conversation in itself).
  Yeah, this never happens to men - they're asking to be raped by women simply by existing whilst male, or sometimes by getting an erection. Totally different. (Now rape of men by men, that's taken seriously - unless it happens in prison, or to someone that deserves it, or someone's asserting their masculinity by making a joke about it.)
  
  However violence against men not being taken seriously as a problem is just another example of how the patriarchy hurts everybody.
  Would you consider yourself to be supporting the patriarchy too by arguing that it shouldn't be taken seriously, or is this another justification for dealing with violence against men by ignoring it and concentrating on violence against women?
Postal 2? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 19:05 · Score: 1

Postal 2 had capture the flag where you had to carry a hooker around as a flag. Not really controversial any more.
This is so wrong on so many levels... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 19:07 · Score: 2, Insightful

It's a game where you run around kill everyone - perfectly acceptable
Hit someone - How disgusting (pure double standards)
But the really really wrong bit, It is such a cheap publicity stunt. All BS and the offending bit will be removed when the story hits the mass media.
Postal 2 by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 19:18 · Score: 0

Already done in Postal 2 Multiplayer. :\ Yet any CTF style in a Mp game is always welcome!
I think... by Red_Chaos1 · 2011-03-21 19:52 · Score: 2

...that movies like Blazing Saddles need to become mandatory viewing. People as a collective need to lighten the fuck up, and learn to laugh a bit.
1. Re:I think... by Sponge+Bath · 2011-03-22 02:07 · Score: 2
  
  Taggart: Well, that's where we go a-ridin' into town, a-whompin' and a-whumpin' every livin' thing that moves within an inch of its life. Except the women folks, of course.
  Hedley Lamarr: You spare the women?
  Taggart: Naw, we rape the shit out of them at the Number Six Dance later on.
  Hedley Lamarr: Marvelous!
2. Re:I think... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 03:39 · Score: 0
  
  Blazing Saddles is awesome.
  It's only problem is that it's a bit dated in its presentation and its humor is offensive. (I mean, why are frontiersmen depicted as being so narrow minded? This runs contrary to their general portrayals in other media, and it makes me uncomfortable.) As such, the movie is inappropriate to a lot of people, especially children. If it should be cleaned up (tweak the frontiersfolk to be more honorable, Mel) then it would be more accessible, and its humor would have a more positive effect on society.
  (See what I did there?)
reason to buy by Tom · 2011-03-21 20:08 · Score: 2

In this time and age of Political Correctness Ãoeber Alles, I am glad that some creative people still enjoy ruffling some feathers. That used to be common in arts, does anyone remember? Today, few artists dare upset the cocktail-drinking ladies in the galleries.
It wouldn't be Duke without stuff like this.

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
1. Re:reason to buy by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 21:39 · Score: 0
  
  While I agree that there is no reason for anyone to be getting offended by this I don't necessarily think that a send up of a genre which spends almost all it's time deep into accidental self parody is really the bold artistic statement you seem to be treating it as.
2. Re:reason to buy by NumLuck · 2011-03-22 04:33 · Score: 1
  
  That used to be common in arts, does anyone remember?
  I like the way you compare Duke Nukem to art.
3. Re:reason to buy by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 05:25 · Score: 1
  
  Accidental self parody? Methinks you missed something. The self-parody is intensional :)
4. Re:reason to buy by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 05:26 · Score: 1
  
  Hurrah! Another games are art discussion! :)
5. Re:reason to buy by brkello · 2011-03-22 10:16 · Score: 1
  
  Really? Is it? Look at what you can see on prime time shows such as Family Guy. They can curse, they insult everyone from religion to specific people, they can talk about sex, they can do massive violence...and beyond. No doubt, they push the envelope with what they can get away with...but imagine this being something shown 50 years ago. Could you imagine? As I see it, things have become progressively less and less PC over the years. More conservative are always going to complain and complain loudly...but this concept that "Wah! Everything is so PC!" just isn't reality.
  
  --
  Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
6. Re:reason to buy by Tom · 2011-03-23 05:16 · Score: 1
  
  prime time shows such as Family Guy. They can curse, they insult everyone from religion to specific people, they can talk about sex, they can do massive violence...and beyond.
  Yes, but not because it is offensive. They can do it because it isn't offensive anymore. That's a perfectly normal development. There were times when just seing a woman's knee was enough to get the man aroused, because it was provocative, uncommon and sexy. Today, you couldn't get the same effect by showing your tits.
  
  As I see it, things have become progressively less and less PC over the years.
  Not at all. PC isn't about being conservative, it is about dressing things up in words that are lies. It is the marketing of language, the PR department of expression. And it has gone far beyond anything we could imagine when it first raised its ugly head. The biggest victory is that people like you think it's been defeated. But look at the world around you, and check what's going on. Everything is dressed in "proper words" these days. I could run down a long list of those terms in my native language, but I'll abstain from english examples because I could only scratch the surface.
  
  --
  Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
7. Re:reason to buy by Tom · 2011-03-23 05:19 · Score: 1
  
  I'm by far not an art critic. However, I've understood this much: It doesn't have to hang in the national gallery to be art. The vast majority of art does not happen in the major galleries, but in smaller ones. The "long tail" applies here as elsewhere.
  That said, I don't say Duke is any kind of fine art. It definitely is of the more base kind, but even so it is art in the same sense that a movie is, even if he's out of Hollywood.
  
  --
  Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
More hype... by Nrrqshrr · 2011-03-21 20:57 · Score: 2

Please, live up to it, Duke...
Fat Princess by _merlin · 2011-03-21 21:45 · Score: 2

Downloadable capture-the-babe game for PS3. If you haven't played Fat Princess, you're missing out.
Ever heard of youtube? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 22:10 · Score: 0

"You can get some things across in screenshots but not really. So we're kinda struggling with how we expose it so people understand what's there."
If screenshots are not good enough make a small video.
DUH!!!!
1. Re:Ever heard of youtube? by delinear · 2011-03-22 01:39 · Score: 1
  
  It's a pity there wasn't some way to take a short, playabale segment of the game and allow people to play that, so as to give a "demonstration", if you will, of what the full game is like.
BattleTanks! by kcbnac · 2011-03-21 22:36 · Score: 2

BattleTanks is the game/series you're thinking of. (They did at least 2, I played the 2nd one long ago when the console was still current, found a copy of the first one later when I bought an N64 on a nostalgia kick)
Because it's fun? by interactive_civilian · 2011-03-21 23:02 · Score: 1

Borderlands was flawed (lame level scaling, inactive NPCs, weak story, etc) but it was fun as hell. I'd love to see a Borderlands 2 fixing those flaws but keeping the cool design and graphics, the quirky humor, the bazillion guns, and so on.
Like any game, it's not for everyone. But, Borderlands was awesome and you suck for not thinking so. :p ;)

--
"Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
1. Re:Because it's fun? by mjwx · 2011-03-22 01:25 · Score: 1
  
  (lame level scaling, inactive NPCs, weak story, etc)
  Wait, which MMORPG are you talking about again?
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
2. Re:Because it's fun? by Quiet_Desperation · 2011-03-22 03:19 · Score: 1
  
  Easily the best co-op game I've ever played, especially with three or four players, although just two was great as well. Hell, I even liked it single player. Semi-open world FTW. The called it a "role playing shooter" up front, so FPS drones should have known the wasn't their linear, go here do that thing.
3. Re:Because it's fun? by N0Man74 · 2011-03-22 03:46 · Score: 2
  
  I second this. Borderlands wasn't a great game, but it was fun. It had many flaws, but it showed that this team has some potential. I at least hope that Borderlands 2 could
  With a sequel, I think it's completely possible that they could drop the ball and make a game that is pure rubbish... but I think there is at least a chance that they could polish their formula and make yet another amusing game.
  It also made enough of an impression on me that it made me think that these guys might be the right guys to pull off a Duke Nuke'em sequel.
4. Re:Because it's fun? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 04:09 · Score: 0
  
  The called it a "role playing shooter" up front, so FPS drones should have known the wasn't their linear, go here do that thing.
  
  FPS drones should have known the wasn't their linear, go here do that thing.
  
  go here do that thing.
  No, that describes Borderlands perfectly.
5. Re:Because it's fun? by slyrat · 2011-03-22 07:09 · Score: 1
  
  Borderlands was flawed (lame level scaling, inactive NPCs, weak story, etc) but it was fun as hell. I'd love to see a Borderlands 2 fixing those flaws but keeping the cool design and graphics, the quirky humor, the bazillion guns, and so on.
  Like any game, it's not for everyone. But, Borderlands was awesome and you suck for not thinking so. :p ;)
  What I really wish was more backstory for the main 4 characters. It even seemed like that would happen leading up to the game first coming out but it turns out there is nothing there.
When the game was originally scheduled... by voss · 2011-03-21 23:17 · Score: 1

It was "capture the baby" ;-)
sounds like Science and Industry by brunascle · 2011-03-21 23:29 · Score: 1

The original Half-Life mod Science and Industry played like a CTF game. The "flags" were scientists, and you captured them by hitting them on they head with a briefcase and carrying them back to your base. What a fun game.
1. Re:sounds like Science and Industry by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-21 23:51 · Score: 0
  
  :) Science and Industry was a great mod... once they were in your base you forced them to do research for you to get better armour and weapons.
Valve time... by Nameisyoung007 · 2011-03-21 23:31 · Score: 3, Insightful

And Duke Nukem Forever is released before Half Like 2: Episode 3. Part of me is crying inside...
1. Re:Valve time... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 03:33 · Score: 0
  
  That would be the birth of a whole new batch of jokes, wouldn't it?
most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 00:09 · Score: 1

many don't
society is sick of sending cops to domestic violence scenes. therefore, society won't let troglodytes have games where there is violence against women. not because there is a definite connection, but simply because its insulting to all that society is working towards in terms of less violence towards women
so sorry assholes, deal with it, but your gaming needs, on a scale of importance of 1 to 10, ranks at zero, compared with some other agendas in the world, namely, less violence towards women and the need to teach people that it is wrong
most can understand that smacking a woman in a videogame does not mean it is socially acceptable. a few can't
no smacking women in videogames: i fully support that. deal with, "tough guy"

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
1. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 00:31 · Score: 1
  
  many don't
  Some don't hold this same opinion, you mean. That's too bad. Also, these same people likely don't feel this way because of games (and, if they did, they would likely be deemed even more 'insane' by society). A few people should not be able to ruin something for the rest. Otherwise, nearly everything would be banned (cars, guns, knifes, etc).
  
  but simply because its insulting to all that society is working towards in terms of less violence towards women
  How is it insulting if nothing becomes of it? That sounds illogical to me.
  
  on a scale of importance of 1 to 10, ranks at zero
  I was not aware that you could decide how important something is to someone else (or, in this case, a very immense group of people). "Importance" is a matter of opinion.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
2. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Broken+scope · 2011-03-22 00:36 · Score: 1
  
  Many people who "don't hit girls" have no issue using their size and strength to coerce, intimidate, and control women.
  It's okay though, "they don't hit girls"
  
  --
  You mad
3. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 00:42 · Score: 1
  
  i can't
  society and majority opinion can
  and we've found less violence towards women to be a lofty goal, and we've found smacking women in videogames to be against that goal, so we're going to deny it
  deal with it, "tough guy"
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
4. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Tyler+Durden · 2011-03-22 01:07 · Score: 1
  
  Hitting *anyone* is wrong, be them male or female. Giving women special status in this regard makes no sense in a day and age where we are striving towards equality of the sexes.
  Of course many will argue that it is especially wrong because men tend to be bigger and stronger than women. But that is more of an argument for "picking on someone your own size", and doesn't always apply to just men hitting women.
  
  --
  Happy people make bad consumers.
5. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 01:12 · Score: 1
  
  of course women hit men. however, men do most of the hitting, and way more of those hits wind up putting someone in the hospital or morgue. thus, it is entirely logical to focus on the wrongness of men hitting women
  but the funny part is, you apparently want to be politically correct about women and men hitting each other... commenting under a story which is all about championing very un-pc videogame content
  so if you are so concerned with political correctness, you want this women slapping content removed, right? you're the one concerned with being politically correct, right?
  irony
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
6. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Tyler+Durden · 2011-03-22 01:26 · Score: 1
  
  so if you are so concerned with political correctness, you want this women slapping content removed, right? you're the one concerned with being politically correct, right? irony
  Once you realize the difference between reality and make-believe, I believe you'll find that the irony disappears.
  
  --
  Happy people make bad consumers.
7. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 01:46 · Score: 1
  
  once you understand that society doesn't like men hitting women, i believe you'll find that you have a problem where you think there is none
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
8. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Tyler+Durden · 2011-03-22 02:02 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, I see. You got that I'm fine with men hitting women from the statement you imagined I made. The one that wasn't there. You really need to work on that whole reality versus make-believe thing. :P
  
  --
  Happy people make bad consumers.
9. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 02:16 · Score: 1
  
  i understand the difference. i hope you understand that whether real, or just depicted in media, society has a problem with a man hitting a woman
  that's not even to say that you can't hit women in media, ever. for example, you could have a man hit a woman in a story, and that man eventually gets a comeuppance for his bad behavior. that's ok, it shows that society does not approve
  but what's not ok, according to society, not just me (and no i'm not a spokesman, i'm just interpreting the brain dead obvious about what most people think for the few here who have some sort of social defect that they can't understand this on their own), is that just the DEPICTION of a man who hits a woman, just for shits and giggles, without any consequences, like we have here, is unacceptable
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
10. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  society and majority opinion can
  No, it can't.
  
  and we've found less violence towards women to be a lofty goal, and we've found smacking women in videogames to be against that goal, so we're going to deny it
  Just like the world is flat, correct? As I said before, if you know it causes no harm to be in a piece of fictional entertainment, then how is it logical to "deny it"?
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
11. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 02:36 · Score: 0
  
  I personally have no interest whatsoever in Duke Nukem, or any other first person shooters for that matter, but I'd say that freedom of speech overrides your desire not to have your feelings hurt because something offensive happens to cartoon characters. If you don't like it, don't buy it. I certainly won't be.
12. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by HaZardman27 · 2011-03-22 02:41 · Score: 1
  
  we've found smacking women in videogames to be against that goal, so we're going to deny it
  What do you mean you're "going to deny it?" Are you implying there is a movement forming to stop this game from being sold?
  
  --
  Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
13. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  society is currently engaged in a many decade, ongoing effort to teach people things like drunk driving is wrong. domestic violence is wrong. do you know how many cops die breaking up domestic situations? how much time and money is wasted? your money? we need to get the lesson across that violence between men and women in a domestic situation is extremely wrong, and we need to get that message across loud and clear. certain media that doesn't get with that program, meanwhile, needs to be squelched
  society doesn't have a problem with guys running around in reality firing RPGs at aliens. therefore this violent fiction has no consequences
  however, as society tries hard to get the word out that domestic violence is a very bad thing, certain media that makes light of a man hitting a woman as a joke, a sight gag, with no consequences, this goes against a larger agenda. if in duke nukem hitting a woman results in some sort of consequence, that it wasn't just a dumb sight gag: that would be ok
  but hitting women as a subject matter can't be taken lightly in any media. not because i'm an uptight prude. but because it's a real problem society is trying to deal with, so the message has to get across loud and clear: hitting women is a no-no, its unacceptable, and any media that makes light of this real problem will not be tolerated
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
14. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  How is it against that goal considering that it contributes nothing to the goal and takes nothing away from it?
  "Society and majority opinion" is at odds with itself and hypocritical: If games are so unimportant and looked down upon then why does it matter if a video game contains the ability to smack a woman? However, if games are so important that this is a grave error that must be fixed, then why isn't it important to realize that it is satirical and should be left in?
15. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  society is currently engaged in a many decade, ongoing effort to teach people things like drunk driving is wrong. domestic violence is wrong. do you know how many cops die breaking up domestic situations? how much time and money is wasted? your money? we need to get the lesson across that violence between men and women in a domestic situation is extremely wrong, and we need to get that message across loud and clear. certain media that doesn't get with that program, meanwhile, needs to be squelched
  society doesn't have a problem with guys running around in reality firing RPGs at aliens. therefore this violent fiction has no consequences. therefore its ok
  however, certain media that makes light of a man hitting a woman as a joke, a sight gag, with no consequences, this goes against a larger agenda. if in duke nukem hitting a woman results in some sort of consequence, that it wasn't just a dumb sight gag: that would be ok
  but hitting women as a subject matter can't be taken lightly in any media. not because i'm an uptight prude. but because it's a real problem society is trying to deal with, the message has to get across loud and clear, on all channels: hitting women is a no-no, its unacceptable, and any media that makes light of this genuine real world problem will not be tolerated
  shooting aliens with RPGs? not so much of a real world problem. make all the jokes you want
  get the difference?
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
16. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by SaroDarksbane · 2011-03-22 02:48 · Score: 0
  
  no smacking women in videogames: i fully support that.
  Simple solution: Don't buy it. If enough people agree with you, it won't do well and game developers will get the message. If enough people disagree with you, well, you've been outvoted.
17. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  society is currently engaged in a many decade, ongoing effort to teach people things like drunk driving is wrong. domestic violence is wrong. do you know how many cops die breaking up domestic situations? how much time and money is wasted? your money? we need to get the lesson across that violence between men and women in a domestic situation is extremely wrong, and we need to get that message across loud and clear. certain media that doesn't get with that program, meanwhile, needs to be squelched
  society doesn't have a problem with guys running around in reality firing RPGs at aliens. therefore this violent fiction has no consequences. make as many jokes as you want
  however, as society tries hard to get the word out that domestic violence is a very bad thing, certain media that makes light of a man hitting a woman as a joke, a sight gag, with no consequences, this goes against a larger agenda. if in duke nukem hitting a woman results in some sort of consequence, that it wasn't just a dumb sight gag: that would be ok
  but hitting women as a subject matter can't be taken lightly in any media. not because i'm an uptight prude. but because it's a real problem society is trying to deal with, so the message has to get across loud and clear: hitting women is a no-no, its unacceptable, and any media that makes light of this real problem will not be tolerated
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
18. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  society is currently engaged in a many decade, ongoing effort to teach people things like drunk driving is wrong. domestic violence is wrong. do you know how many cops die breaking up domestic situations? how much time and money is wasted? your money? we need to get the lesson across that violence between men and women in a domestic situation is extremely wrong, and we need to get that message across loud and clear. certain media that doesn't get with that program, meanwhile, needs to be squelched
  of course, the makers of duke nukem can release the game, making light of a man hitting a woman as a joke, a sight gag, with no consequences. but this goes against a larger agenda. that agenda will be angered, and video games will be more tightly controlled? do you want that? however, if in duke nukem hitting a woman results in some sort of consequence, that it wasn't just a dumb sight gag: that would be ok, because it fits with the agenda: hitting a woman is wrong, its not a joke
  society doesn't have a problem with guys running around in reality firing RPGs at aliens. therefore this violent fiction has no consequences
  however, as society tries hard to get the word out that domestic violence is a very bad thing, hitting women as a subject matter can't be taken lightly in any media. not because i'm an uptight prude. but because it's a real problem society is trying to deal with, so the message has to get across loud and clear: hitting women is a no-no, its unacceptable, and any media that makes light of this real problem will not be tolerated
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
19. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 02:51 · Score: 1
  
  Ooo! OO! Can I try?
  Once you understand that society doesn't like anyone hitting anyone (hello, assault and battery?) I believe you'll find that focusing only on men hitting women is counter to the obvious goal of equality and that the actions in a game are completely inconsequential to that point since it's been beat over the head of pretty much everyone already and no one is going to change their opinion and decide that hitting women is completely correct due to a video game.
  Perhaps the irony is not in defending being PC about men hitting women AND women hitting men AND men hitting women AND women hitting women under the defense of un-PC content, but the irony is that you don't realize the entire point of defending the content of DNF is to spark the various discussions that are here. That when you focus on the fact that it's not PC for a guy to smack a women, it's hypocrisy that it implies that it's completely ok for a woman to hit a man, or man to hit a man, or woman to hit a woman when all situations should be seen the same way. Hence the desire for equality. The problem is people like you who make a bigger deal over men against women because it's "a bigger problem" and thus promote the continued behavior of treating the situations differently.
20. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 02:52 · Score: 1
  
  teenagers are retards. they'll buy anything. they need to be educated. there's more in play here than the free market, there's teaching right and wrong
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
21. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 02:53 · Score: 0
  
  blah blah blah
  men mostly hit women
  men mostly need to be told that that is wrong
  duh
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
22. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by HaZardman27 · 2011-03-22 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  I can understand and appreciate that; I was merely referring to the fact that your wording suggested there was a movement to get this game banned. I'm simply inquiring if that is true.
  
  --
  Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
23. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 03:04 · Score: 1
  
  You do realize that in the case of Duke Nukem, it's not just a sight gag? That the entire point for having him hit a woman is because it's not PC. It's satire, it's funny because it's making fun of the double standard. If he were smacking another guy or just punching him, there would be no uproar. It's not like society doesn't have a problem with bar fights or any other situation involving guys hitting guys. Society also has a problem with women hitting women, and probably even more serious than violence against women by men is the violence against men by women which largely goes unreported and ignored because the man should just "deal with it" or "take it in stride" as most men do because their men.
  In fact, Duke furthers the idea of showing that hitting a woman is wrong simply because he's doing it. He's the epitome of every bad cliche and macho action that society despises now. What used to be seen as being "manly" is seen as wrong and bad.
  
  Certain media that doesn't get with that program, meanwhile, needs to be squelched
  Advocating censorship? How about you prove that the media is causing domestic violence before deciding that. =)
  
  but hitting women as a subject matter can't be taken lightly in any media. not because i'm an uptight prude. but because it's a real problem society is trying to deal with, so the message has to get across loud and clear: hitting women is a no-no, its unacceptable, and any media that makes light of this real problem will not be tolerated
  If every subject that is a real problem society is trying to deal with had to be removed from media then we wouldn't have much media left. Society is still trying to deal with murder, rape, burglary, bullying, and lots of other issues. You've chosen "violence against women" as one that you're advocating about, that's great. It is. But no one is going to play this game and think that because Duke hit a women to shut her up while kidnapping her (um, why is hitting her wrong but it's perfectly fine that she's being kidnapped?) that means that hitting a woman is perfectly fine? Why stop there? Don't we also need to get across that hitting a man is wrong too? Gotta be equal right? Why not also get across that shooting someone is wrong, take the guns out! See the problem here?
24. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 03:08 · Score: 1
  
  I didn't say they didn't. But look at society, with the way that people protect women and put them on a pedestal anyone who doesn't know that society says hitting a woman is wrong is insane. But people do it anyways. That means that just "telling them it is wrong" is not going to change anything. You have to actually do something about it. A game is not going to change the mind of someone who knows it is wrong to believe it is acceptable.
25. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 03:08 · Score: 1
  
  domestic violence is a serious problem. most of it is done by men. it's simply not funny
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
26. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Locke2005 · 2011-03-22 03:11 · Score: 2
  
  Violence is violence, but treating female characters as chattel, e.g. a prize to be won, is also offensive.
  
  As far as domestic violence is concerned, 30% of it is woman on man violence, and women are twice as likely to use a weapon. Violence isn't something that men do to women and children, it is something that people do to people.
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
27. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 03:12 · Score: 1
  
  there will be if duke nukem thinks hitting a woman is a silly joke. so it behooves the developers to make sure there isn't a backlash that other game developers will suffer for in future products and future regulations they don't want to deal with
  all duke nukem has to do is make hitting a woman have very serious consequences. they can still depict it. make the consequences funny for the troglodytes. but it can't be communicated that hitting a woman has no consequences and is a funny inconsequential joke in and of itself
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
28. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 03:15 · Score: 1
  
  if you have a game where hitting a women is a joke in and of itself, that's a piece of media that is telling people it is ok, even funny to hit a woman. that's a message people won't want to tolerate
  you could still depict hitting a woman. just give the act a major consequence. something the funny the troglodytes can laugh at. but a message in media saying hitting women is silly, inconsequential, and even funny: no, sorry, that's wrong, in and of itself, no matter all the other issues you raise
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
29. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 03:16 · Score: 1
  
  society is currently engaged in a many decade, ongoing effort to teach people things like drunk driving is wrong. domestic violence is wrong.
  It isn't necessarily "wrong." That's just an opinion.
  
  we need to get the lesson across that violence between men and women in a domestic situation is extremely wrong, and we need to get that message across loud and clear. certain media that doesn't get with that program, meanwhile, needs to be squelched
  In other words, freedom of speech/expression needs to be done away with if you do not agree with it. Many find it fun. Most, even those who don't, will not be affected by it. So, I ask again: what is the problem? Why ban something if it causes no problems (as you implied above)?
  
  get the difference?
  No. Shooting other beings is wrong!
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
30. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 03:19 · Score: 1
  
  you're telling me domestic violence isn't wrong?
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
31. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 03:22 · Score: 1
  
  but treating female characters as chattel, e.g. a prize to be won, is also offensive
  Yes, it's offensive. But that's the joke. I think it was said very well in TFA if you read the scans. "All of the offensiveness, the actions, within Duke's world it is all serious. It makes sense and is the way things work. It's only when you look at it through the lens of our world and our society that you get the joke." well..i paraphrased a little but you get the idea.
32. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 03:25 · Score: 1
  
  As someone else in this thread said: "As far as domestic violence is concerned, 30% of it is woman on man violence, and women are twice as likely to use a weapon. Violence isn't something that men do to women and children, it is something that people do to people".
  Murder is also a serious problem, why can that be funny? Bullying is also a serious problem, why can that be funny? It may not be funny to you. Fine, you have a right to your opinion. But if you've ever laughed at a racist joke or dead baby joke or joke involving someone dying, then you're just being hypocritical.
33. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 03:32 · Score: 1
  
  i've laughed at all sorts of crude jokes in my life, but i've never endorsed any of them for general consumption. there is a difference between what you and your buddies say to each other in private and what society condones for mass consumption
  
  --
  intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
34. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 03:36 · Score: 1
  
  ... Wow, you completely missed the entire point. Hitting a woman is not the joke in and of itself. Duke Nukem is an amalgamation of super macho action heroes stepped up to 11. He's the epitome of everything that is chauvinistic and non-PC. The joke is looking at his world through the lens of our own realizing how offensive he is and the fact that he smacks a woman makes perfect sense for his character and the world he lives in. I'll say it again, the joke is looking at it through the lens of our own world, knowing that it is offensive, and that the entire reason they had him do that is because it's offensive which is the point of the Duke character and the world he lives in.
  You have a world where aliens are kidnapping women to use them to breed an army while turning all the men into literal Pigs. How do you not see the satire? It doesn't show Duke in a positive light, it doesn't even show men in general in a positive light. It's offensive, it's so offensive that it's funny because of how over-the-top it is. With the strippers being kidnapped, using women to breed, the Fellatio Hotel (i.e. the Bellagio) which is attended by entire families, why is him hitting a woman the only thing that you think is wrong? Isn't it also offensive to turn men into Pig creatures? Gimme a break. Picking this one thing out as offensive and condemning is hypocritical. If you find any other part of the game humorous then you're being hypocritical. If you've ever laughed at a racist joke then you're being hypocritical.
  One last time in case you didn't get it, hitting a woman is not in and of itself the joke. The fact that hitting women is offensive and the game knows it is the joke.
35. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  Why?
36. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by slothman32 · 2011-03-22 04:12 · Score: 1
  
  I haven't tried replying since the new system so let's hope it works out.
  As per your sig:
  "Guns don't kill people; batshit-crazy people with guns kill people!"
  Can't you use guano instead. :D
  I do agree with you though.
  
  --
  Why don't you guys have friends or journals?
37. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 04:19 · Score: 0
  
  most people understand hitting a woman is wrong
  Strictly speaking, it's right to hit a woman in any circumstance that it would be right to hit a man; and wrong to hit a woman in any circumstance that it would be wrong to hit a man. Gender is irrelevant.
  Hitting a woman in order to kidnap her is wrong, but that doesn't have anything to do with gender. Hitting a PERSON to kidnap A PERSON is wrong. However, since this is a work of fiction, there is no ethical concern. This isn't a human hitting, this isn't a human being hit.
38. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 04:24 · Score: 0
  
  As a member of this society you speak of, I respectfully disagree with your viewpoint. I find that anything in a game is MAKE BELIEVE, i.e., NOT REAL and therefore, take no viewpoint on what the game does in this regard. When I buy games, I buy them for one of three reasons:
  1.) It looks like a game I would enjoy
  2.) It entertains me
  3.) I support the "cause" (i.e., I bought a very shitty version of UT specifically because it included a linux binary)
  I don't give a shit about morals while playing the game because it's make believe.
  Now, please, sit down, shut up, and enjoy the ride. I for one will be out buying this game the day it comes out regardless of whether or not a woman get slapped around a little in a capture the flag match.
39. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Locke2005 · 2011-03-22 04:59 · Score: 1
  
  I see... so if the game had a "capture the flag" mode where you fought your way into your opponent's base, grabbed a black man in chains, and then slapped him around for being "uppity", you would consider that "just a joke" too? Today's joke is tomorrow's accepted behavior.
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
40. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by zeroshade · 2011-03-22 05:16 · Score: 1
  
  If the game was trying to be serious about it then obviously it's not "just a joke". However if, like DNF, the game was itself a giant satirical joke where the behavior itself was only a joke because it was not accepted behavior, and it made sense within the context of the game instead of being there for the sake of being there. Under the right circumstances in the right presentation, yea it could be just a joke, in a "it's funny because it's wrong" way, but that's just my sense of humor. Granted if it was a completely gratuitous, 'only there to cause a stir' that had no context within the game, then I wouldn't say it was "wrong" and "bad" and "evil" as people portray this, I would say that it was something tasteless only placed in the game to cause controversy rather than actually fitting into the world in which it lives. Duke's behavior fits the context of the world he lives in. I mean come on, aliens are kidnapping women to BREED them and turning men into pig creatures, how is this the most offensive thing in the game and deserving of the ire of so many people among the rest of the chauvinistic and misogynistic dialogue and world that the game takes place in?
  
  Today's joke is tomorrow's accepted behavior
  I much prefer Today's unacceptable behavior is tomorrow's joke.
  The real question is that if you had a female protagonist who was as much of a misandrist as Duke is a misogynist who and it was Capture the Dude and you smacked him around for leaving the toilet seat up or some other stereotype, would there be this much outcry? I highly doubt it.
41. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 05:53 · Score: 0
  
  Because he's allowed to be a hypocrite in private.
42. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 05:57 · Score: 0
  
  Um, yes, if that actually made sense and was something that fit into the theme of the game and you could imagine the character actually doing it, it would be funny. But in this case it really wouldn't make sense.
43. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 06:19 · Score: 0
  
  dude, you copy-pasted the same message five or six times. We get it, society is engaged in blah blah blah.
  At least tailor your reply to the message you're replying to. Make a little bit of effort.
44. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 06:21 · Score: 0
  
  What about violence towards men? Why isn't that just as serious?
45. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 07:51 · Score: 0
  
  any media that makes light of this real problem will not be tolerated
  I'm not particularly concerned whether this game is tolerated socially, but it should, and most likely will, be tolerated legally.
46. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 08:24 · Score: 0
  
  You seem to be arguing that it's wrong on the basis of either because you say it is or because society says it is (kinda hard to tell), to which the answers are respectively "so what if someone says it isn't" and "plenty of other societies haven't".
47. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by SaroDarksbane · 2011-03-22 08:40 · Score: 0
  
  Just to be clear, what is your recommendation? Government action to ban it? A protest outside Gamestops everywhere? What?
  
  Because by the definition you just gave, no censorship is out of bounds so long as someone out there wants to "teach right and wrong" to someone else (especially the children! Won't somebody think of them??)
48. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-22 10:23 · Score: 1
  
  I think it is. But 'right' and 'wrong' are not universal. They are subjective (which doesn't mean that society can't try to stop those that it believes is hurting it).
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
49. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Lord+Kano · 2011-03-22 14:45 · Score: 1
  
  domestic violence is a serious problem. most of it is done by men. it's simply not funny
  That's simply not true. The truth of the matter is that women initiate domestic violence just as often as men. The disparity in upper body strength between men and women means that in a mutual combat situation, the women gets hurt worse. Men who sustain minor injuries are less likely to report them to police. The minor injuries that a men receives in a domestic assault can usually be explained away with 'guy stuff', was working on the truck and a wrench slipped, etc...
  My fiancee had placenta previa when she was pregnant with our daughter, I took her to the hospital because she was bleeding. They contrived some bullshit reason to get us into separate rooms and asked her if she had been hit! Hospital policy...
  You also discount the very real problem of lesbian domestic violence. It isn't that men beat women, it's not that women beat men, it's that people beat people.
  LK
  
  --
  "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
50. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by IronSight · 2011-03-22 18:25 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, this is new stuff here. Before today, no women were slapped in music, movies, plays, books, or any media whatsoever. I haven't ever heard a person going to jail ever say, "Duke Nukem made me slap/kill/donkey punch my wife". Though I have seem some radical muslims/christians abuse the crap out of their wives because the bible/koran told them it was okay. In the real world, only those that live in a fantasy world think something is okay because of something they read/watched/heard in the media. Smart people do smart things, not so smart... well don't. If it isn't this game that causes said crazy to lose it and slap his wife, it will be another. Blame crazy people for being crazy, and leave the rest of the people the hell alone.
51. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by Maritz · 2011-03-23 12:44 · Score: 1
  
  Is this some kind of moral relativist approach? There is no such thing as right and wrong, just opinions? If you think it's wrong, and I think it's right, do we just split the difference and call it a grey area? I would say people who mete out domestic violence (men and women) are likely to be the ones who think it's OK, and personally I could care less what they think, they're bullies and their victims should be offered protection. I don't really have an opinion on the game though, haven't seen it. Sounds pretty cringey though.
  
  --
  I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
52. Re:most people understand hitting a woman is wrong by cheekyjohnson · 2011-03-23 14:00 · Score: 1
  
  There is no "right" or "wrong." There is only opinions about what is "right" and "wrong." At this current point of time, there is no evidence that I am aware of that proves otherwise.
  
  If you think it's wrong, and I think it's right, do we just split the difference and call it a grey area?
  Everything is a gray area, as for as I'm aware. However, that does not mean that that should stop you from doing what you think is "right." That doesn't mean that society still can't punish people that it thinks are "wrong." It just needs to recognize the difference between opinions and facts, I think. It's a minor correction, really.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Perhaps a reason to go Windows a little by erroneus · 2011-03-22 00:43 · Score: 1

I have been Linux only for a very long time. I have Windows (in a VM) at work and a little Mac at home... I think it's time I did a little BootCamping on my Mac Mini so I can do this game.
I have an XBox360... two actually and so I might get this game there too. I can hardly wait. I haven't been interested in gaming for a long time, but there's enough nostalgia in this game that I think I will really enjoy it.
(I hope they actually port the old maps into this game as added content... I really loved the old Duke3D... yeah I can, and probably will play it under Linux again)
Re:I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass by Tsingi · 2011-03-22 01:13 · Score: 1

I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum.
No, no, it's: I'm here to kick ass or chew gum. An I'm all outta gum.
The most controversial bit is ignored. by VGPowerlord · 2011-03-22 01:25 · Score: 3, Interesting

Everyone so far seems to be ignoring the most controversial bit in the multiplayer announcement.
In 2011, Duke Nukem Forever only supports eight-player multiplayer. EIGHT PLAYER multiplayer.
What does Gearbox think this is, the 90s?

--
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
1. Re:The most controversial bit is ignored. by nemesisrocks · 2011-03-22 10:54 · Score: 1
  
  In 2011, Duke Nukem Forever only supports eight-player multiplayer. EIGHT PLAYER multiplayer.
  What does Gearbox think this is, the 90s?
  Wonder if it works over IPX too, like the good ol' days. I miss Kali!
2. Re:The most controversial bit is ignored. by Rexdude · 2011-03-24 03:14 · Score: 1
  
  Relax, this isn't Halo or Counterstrike where 'more the merrier' is best. In fact, it would be tons more fun if they allowed you to start your own server and host a LAN party, like the good old Quakes and Unreal Tournaments of yesteryear without having to log onto some server maintained by the company and have to listen to anonymous 14 year olds hurling abuses over headphones.
  
  --
  "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
3. Re:The most controversial bit is ignored. by VGPowerlord · 2011-03-24 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  Relax, this isn't Halo or Counterstrike where 'more the merrier' is best. In fact, it would be tons more fun if they allowed you to start your own server and host a LAN party, like the good old Quakes and Unreal Tournaments of yesteryear without having to log onto some server maintained by the company and have to listen to anonymous 14 year olds hurling abuses over headphones.
  I don't remember how many players Quake 1 supported, but the original Unreal Tournament supported 16 player multiplayer games.
  Hell, I currently run two (non-LAN) 24-player Team Fortress 2 servers that aren't "maintained by the company." Granted, they aren't LAN servers, but they definitely have a core audience who keep coming back, and we ban problem players as we see fit.
  
  --
  GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
4. Re:The most controversial bit is ignored. by Rexdude · 2011-03-24 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  I haven't been up to date on gaming for over 5 years, but based on discussions here I understand that many modern games have removed the ability to host your own server. This is also in line with the console crowd, who can't use other servers anyway. So when a company decides to shut down its server, your copy of the game becomes useless for multiplayer..compare with how old classics like the entire Quake/UT series, Half Life 1, TFC, or even something as ancient as Doom can be used for LAN parties over and over. I remember when the server browser in the original UT used to have dozens of entries.
  
  --
  "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
5. Re:The most controversial bit is ignored. by VGPowerlord · 2011-03-24 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  I haven't been up to date on gaming for over 5 years, but based on discussions here I understand that many modern games have removed the ability to host your own server. This is also in line with the console crowd, who can't use other servers anyway. So when a company decides to shut down its server, your copy of the game becomes useless for multiplayer..compare with how old classics like the entire Quake/UT series, Half Life 1, TFC, or even something as ancient as Doom can be used for LAN parties over and over. I remember when the server browser in the original UT used to have dozens of entries.
  Some games force you to use the manufacturer's servers. Not all games do.
  Duke Nukem likely won't. Games that use Valve's Source engine generally don't. Games based on the Unreal 3 engine generally don't. Game that use the iDTech engines generally don't. Most modern games from Activision Blizzard do, including StarCraft 2 and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.
  Now, having said that, some of the games that allow you to host your own servers lose features when they don't talk to their master servers. For example, Team Fortress 2 (Source Orangebox engine) loses all its unlockable weapons, leaving you just with the stock weaponry. Killing Floor (UT2k4 engine) loses its perks leveling system.
  
  --
  GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
Just one thing... by HaZardman27 · 2011-03-22 01:36 · Score: 1

Imagine what Vent chat is going to be like for this game...

--
Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
1. Re:Just one thing... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 19:58 · Score: 0
  
  I'VE GOT BALLS OF STEEL ...... ......
  BALLS OF STEEL
  BALLS
  BALLS
  BALLS
  BALLS
  "Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING."
  uhh ... duh, I'm trying to yell .... stupid filter, go fuck yerself.
"Sorry if I sound like a jerk." by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 01:41 · Score: 1

No. You sound like a bitch.
The perfect opportunity... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 01:51 · Score: 0

... for Duke to say "Gotta keep my pimp hand strong" when he does this.
I bet the game makers totally missed this golden opportunity because that particular Duke quote would become an instant classic.
You can plant trip bombs on players and enemies by runner_one · 2011-03-22 01:52 · Score: 1

This is reason enough alone to buy the game, I always wanted to do that.
BattleTanx by Fallingcow · 2011-03-22 01:58 · Score: 1

BattleTanx, actually. Not nitpicking, just want to make it a bit easier on anyone who wants to Google it.
We used to play the second one, Global Assault, quite a bit. Great friggin' game. Desperately needs a current-gen sequel. Not sure who owns the rights since the 3DO bankruptcy.
tell ya what i'd do if i ever found one of them... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 02:10 · Score: 0

cocktail-drinking ladies in MY gallery ....
i'd slap the shit out of her.
The proof is in the pudding? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 02:11 · Score: 0

The phrase is "the proof of the pudding is in the eating."
When will people stop being stupid?
1. Re:The proof is in the pudding? by maxwell+demon · 2011-03-22 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  Well, it's a fortune pudding, containing a proof as fortune. :-)
  
  --
  The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
2. Re:The proof is in the pudding? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 05:13 · Score: 0
  
  Yes. Many of us are aware of this. It's just that... we don't really care. "The proof is in the pudding" is so much easier to type and say and, because the original quote is so antiquated, the newer, albeit less historically accurate saying will suffice. We will continue to say, "the proof is in the pudding" with complete disregard to how many times we're "corrected" by you pinky-curling, stick-up-the-butt whiners.
  Shut up.
Not new by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 02:27 · Score: 0

Going Postal 2 had capture the babe where each side had a heart shaped bed with a girl on it. The goal was to capture the other teams babe and bring her back to your bed with your babe there. When you had both babes on your bed your team would win and the babes would start to make out.
Most people understand mass destruction is wrong by _0xd0ad · 2011-03-22 02:27 · Score: 1

The few people who think it's okay because it's in a video game shouldn't be playing video games. That goes for any of the killing, mass chaos, and generally bad behavior that just about any video game is going to include, including misogynistic behavior like this.
The rest of us can differentiate between video games and reality, and we don't need to have our games sanitized. Halo would suck if we all made friends and had tea parties.
Re:Most people understand mass destruction is wron by circletimessquare · 2011-03-22 02:35 · Score: 1

0.01% of the game playing public is ever going to pick up an RPG. 0% will meet aliens
however, 90% will be in a domestic situation some point in their life where physical violence crosses their minds
you know, you could, in fact, depict a man hitting a woman in media if that man gets a comeuppance for that behavior. but what you can't do is have a man hitting a woman, just for fun, without any consequences
society is trying to teach that men who hit women are wrong. we can't be loosey goosey with the message. we don't need media that goes against the lesson plan. society has an agenda to decrease domestic violence. many cops die responding to domestic situations, and it wastes a lot of their time, and your tax dollars. so society has very good reasons to look very disapprovingly on media that depicts a man hitting a woman without any consequences, just for a sight gag
because men hitting women is a huge social problem, not a silly sight gag. meanwhile, society really doesn't have a problem with guys running around firing RPGs at aliens. so that violent fiction, not a problem

--
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Fat Princess... by HockeyPuck · 2011-03-22 02:40 · Score: 1

Nothing new here...
In the PS3 Download, Fat Princess its a basic capture the flag however, the "Flag" is a princess for which you make it harder to capture by feeding her cake, which as you guessed it makes her fatter, and thereby harder to carry.
And yes people protested this as well...
Pudding by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 02:51 · Score: 0

I don't mean to be overly pedantic, but the proof is not in the pudding, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
You don't know how close... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 02:58 · Score: 0

... it came to actually being called "Capture the Fag", with Duke punching the girlieman in the face, but Gearbox would not allow it.
What... by Locke2005 · 2011-03-22 03:06 · Score: 1

No "gang bang" mode?

Yes, treating female characters as property IS offensive.

--
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
the Mayans were right! by Thud457 · 2011-03-22 03:14 · Score: 5, Funny

lessee,
1. we got a coed-raping bond villain causing the downfall of half the governments in North Africa (remember him?)
2. the President of Egypt is forced out of office by mobs in the street enraged by #1
3. Charlie Sheen reveals himself as the Twelfth Imam to the world. He's also pyrokinetic and an indigo child. Probably sent from the future, too.
4. a record-breaking earthquake hits Japan
5. leading to a record breaking tsunami hitting Japan
6. leading to a record-breaking clusterfuck of a nuclear accident involving four reactors and numerous cooling ponds of radioactive waste -- in Japan.
7. Britain's having a royal wedding
8. Our Nobel Peace prize - winning President is bombing the shit out of Mohammar Ghadaffi in Libya, instigated, once again by J. Assange (see #1)
9. Oh yeah, whoever was in charge of Tunisia was chased out of office by Arab mobs (see #1)
10. And Yemen is following suit.
11. Don't forget open class warfare breaking out in Wisconsin as the Governor there gives those greedy teachers what they got comin' to them. Next up, firefighters and police...

So, by my estimate, we're right on schedule for release of DNF.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1. Re:the Mayans were right! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 04:43 · Score: 0
  
  Shame you didn't leave the "mayan reference" for an item 12. ;)
rest of the dominoes will fall like house of cards by Tetsujin · 2011-03-22 03:26 · Score: 1

The phrase is "the proof of the pudding is in the eating."
When will people stop being stupid?
Heh, good one. It looks like the upper hand is on the other foot, now!

--
Bow-ties are cool.
hitting a PERSON is wrong by Tetsujin · 2011-03-22 03:44 · Score: 1

society is currently engaged in a many decade, ongoing effort to teach people things like drunk driving is wrong. domestic violence is wrong. do you know how many cops die breaking up domestic situations? how much time and money is wasted? your money?
Hm, you make a good point, we need to put a stop to this right away!
From now on, police should not respond to domestic violence complaints!

--
Bow-ties are cool.
To stifle PC... by sabt-pestnu · 2011-03-22 04:51 · Score: 1

All they need to do is provide a local option that swaps models: The players become amazons (or valkyries, depending on your tastes) and the "flag babe" becomes "flag beefcake". See? Equal Opportunity Offender!
Re:Most people understand mass destruction is wron by _0xd0ad · 2011-03-22 05:33 · Score: 1

0.01% of the game playing public is ever going to pick up an RPG. 0% will meet aliens
however, 90% will be in a domestic situation some point in their life where physical violence crosses their minds
And 100% of them will be in some situation some point in their life where physical violence crosses their minds. So by that logic we should be having tea parties instead of playing Halo.
approx quote by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 05:34 · Score: 0

Capture the babe? Slap the bitch?
"You're gonna die for that"
Re:Most people understand mass destruction is wron by Bergs007 · 2011-03-22 06:39 · Score: 1

Thank you very much for your last sentence. When I first read that 0.01% of the game playing public would pick up a Role Playing Game, I thought that sounded a bit on the low side.
Make the babe... by d0g_solitude · 2011-03-22 06:46 · Score: 1

...look like Sarah Palin, and the politically correct liberals won't complain about it.
Old news, moving on by TiggertheMad · 2011-03-22 06:59 · Score: 1

The amount of children that view/play violent media is likely staggeringly high. How many of them are actually insane enough actually imitate the violence and try it on others?

I know, right? Remember when we were kids, and we would always emulate looney tunes and drop anvils on neighborhood dogs that we had put on rocket powered roller skates? Oh, wait, THAT NEVER HAPPENED.

news flash: normal people don't get violent because they see violence. Mentally 'fragile' people are dangerous in any case.

--

HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Is *this* fun? by Quiet_Desperation · 2011-03-22 07:11 · Score: 0

Nuh-uh! No it doesn't! Pbbbbbtttt! :-P
u mad?
Re:Most people understand mass destruction is wron by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 08:10 · Score: 0

The last video game I bought (to play myself, not for my kids) was Cool Boarders 2 for the Playstation (not playstation 2 or 3, the original one). After all this conversation I am really interested to get this game just to check this out and see what all the fuss is about. I will probably have to get some help from the kids to get to this slapping the babe part, but I'm really looking forward to it now.
Re:I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass by android.dreamer · 2011-03-22 08:31 · Score: 1

My source is IMDB for the quote from the film, which was then re-purposed into the game. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096256/quotes
Re:Neck by Tsingi · 2011-03-22 08:53 · Score: 1

Also attributed to Dr. Detroit. (Dan Akroyd)
Rape? Are you a rapist? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 09:59 · Score: 0

it sounds like you are advocating rape.
Duke Nukem is a RIPOFF of Roddy Piper (They Live). by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 10:13 · Score: 0

3DRealms should be sued by Roddy Piper for breaching the character of Duke Nukem when they adapted the story from They Live.
But this isn't going to happen, seeing that the movie They Live is about fighting-off invading Reptilian aliens remeniscent of JEWS, the same that probably published They Live and are probably the same that are marketing Duke Nukem Forever.
Never in the movie They Live would Roddy Piper ever portray himself as disorderly to human women, but those JEWS err Reptilians are the ones that are going to get a shotgun blast to the head.
Alex Jones (maried a Jewess and has 3 Jewish children) is the guy that brings them into the News Studio.
David Ike is the black preacher.
Women dislike sexualized violence by Lythn · 2011-03-22 16:01 · Score: 1

That would never sell. Women aren't big on sexualized violence.
Capture the woman - great for double dates! by Lythn · 2011-03-22 16:21 · Score: 1

Eight people, that's just perfect for couple's night! I feel so sorry for all the girlfriends who are going to have to pretend this is funny.
The actually travesty is buried in the article... by TheStatsMan · 2011-03-22 17:00 · Score: 1

Duke is going to have talent points.
Your Ass, Your Face.... by wideBlueSkies · 2011-03-23 13:07 · Score: 1

Your Ass? Your Face? What's the difference?
--Duke Nukem

--
Huh?