It's hard for me to jump up and say, "Yeah! Way to go!" at the so-called honorable actions of other games pulling out of the Festival. Sure, it was stupid of Slamdance to allow SCRPG to enter only to disqualify them at the end. It's like allowing a drug using, girl-gone-wild type into a Miss America pagent only to disqualify her later because she's a drug using, girl-gone-wild type.
Er... wait... what?
Seriously, although I am not for disqualifying the SCRPG, how would you feel about a new FPS entering the contest called Maryland Sniper? Remember the guy who was sniping innocent people coming out of the parking lot or attempting to use a gas pump? Would that be an acceptable entry as well?
I mean, look, after all the WWII and Iraq Desert conflict style games that are out, let's face it, this SCRPG is not much different. Anyway you look at it, the fundamentals are this, one group of people waged war against another, took lethal action, and tragedy ensued.
So at what point does one feel that a violent video game has crossed the line? Grand Theft Auto, a game where the player steals cars, kills hookers (Vice City) and pretends to be a stereotyped Uncle Tom gangster (San Andreas), has pretty much been accepted as gaming norm. Ironically enough, brain drained politicians felt the hot coffee mod where two 3D animated sprites humping one another was far worse than shooting a prostitute in the gut, stepping on her face, stealing a car and running over pedestrians.
And what constitutes the 'line being crossed' scenario? It seems in this case, the "too soon?" cliche is what crosses the line, although that argument gets shot to hell when Iraq War games hit the shelves three years after the conflict began. It seems to me there is no line when it comes to video game violence. There is only pushing the envelope by displaying contextual scenarios and situations that happen to be violent. For example, a game where I can, with graphic results, shoot a hooker in the face, no problem, but if I bring her up to my virtual apartment and, with graphic results, dry hump her, there's a problem with that. If I shoot her in the face afterwards, serious, serious problems, but only because I dry humped her first.
See? It's baseless. There is no line. There is only the ability of players to understand the level of realism they are simulating. This is obviously just Slamdance making a really dumb decision at a very poor time. If they would have refused the game in the getgo, well, then they'd have to come up with a pretty good reason why and I think they didn't feel like doing so as it might impede on their slamdanciness, so to speak.
Here's a question: What if this were called Super Columbine Simulator, instead of RPG? Too Soon?
We've been hearing this "Every Household has a Robot by 2000" crap since the early 80's. Theoretically it all depends how you define "Robot". Things like the Scooba: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scooba are basically flat little R2-D2's that roll around the house sucking up your craplets while avoiding walls. I guarantee you'll see more of these in the corporate sectors ala the mouse droids running from growling Wookiees.
As far as Robby the Robot or the little girl from Small Wonder (remember her?) forget it. There is no practical application of owning a protocol type droid unless you are elderly, disabled, and don't get on with humans very well. I mean, how feasible is it to pay $5000+ dollars to order your droid to fetch you another beer while you sit on your ass watching Deal or No Deal?
The argument may be, spouses or siblings are far more expensive and often question the beer fetching with their limited albiet effective logic and reasoning ability (pesky humans), but the praticality of a fully functioning human depending on a questionably functioning Microsoft Robot is dim. After awhile that fetch droid becomes that cool massager/remote control chair you bought at Sharper Image years ago that's now sitting in the basement collecting spider webs.
And a Microsoft robot? Sheesh!
It's all fun and games until Microsoft Nanny crashes mid-stairwell and drops granny to her doom.
From the article: "One United employee appeared emotionally shaken by the sighting and "experienced some religious issues" over it, one co-worker said."
Prepare yourselves for a digitally inserted, blue glowy River Phoenix.
Tremble before the mind blowing revelation when Sean Connery announces to the Nazis, "I am the Senate!"
And witness the incredible love scenes between a reunited Indiana and Marion Ravenwood, "I hate snakes. They're slimy, scaly, and they get everywhere. Not like here, where everything is... wrinkley and aging."
"DieHard is a piece of software which helps programs to run correctly and protects them from a range of security vulnerabilities. "
So it's basically a Tron program?
Slashdot Mirror
It's hard for me to jump up and say, "Yeah! Way to go!" at the so-called honorable actions of other games pulling out of the Festival. Sure, it was stupid of Slamdance to allow SCRPG to enter only to disqualify them at the end. It's like allowing a drug using, girl-gone-wild type into a Miss America pagent only to disqualify her later because she's a drug using, girl-gone-wild type.
Er... wait... what?
Seriously, although I am not for disqualifying the SCRPG, how would you feel about a new FPS entering the contest called Maryland Sniper? Remember the guy who was sniping innocent people coming out of the parking lot or attempting to use a gas pump? Would that be an acceptable entry as well?
I mean, look, after all the WWII and Iraq Desert conflict style games that are out, let's face it, this SCRPG is not much different. Anyway you look at it, the fundamentals are this, one group of people waged war against another, took lethal action, and tragedy ensued.
So at what point does one feel that a violent video game has crossed the line? Grand Theft Auto, a game where the player steals cars, kills hookers (Vice City) and pretends to be a stereotyped Uncle Tom gangster (San Andreas), has pretty much been accepted as gaming norm. Ironically enough, brain drained politicians felt the hot coffee mod where two 3D animated sprites humping one another was far worse than shooting a prostitute in the gut, stepping on her face, stealing a car and running over pedestrians.
And what constitutes the 'line being crossed' scenario? It seems in this case, the "too soon?" cliche is what crosses the line, although that argument gets shot to hell when Iraq War games hit the shelves three years after the conflict began. It seems to me there is no line when it comes to video game violence. There is only pushing the envelope by displaying contextual scenarios and situations that happen to be violent. For example, a game where I can, with graphic results, shoot a hooker in the face, no problem, but if I bring her up to my virtual apartment and, with graphic results, dry hump her, there's a problem with that. If I shoot her in the face afterwards, serious, serious problems, but only because I dry humped her first.
See? It's baseless. There is no line. There is only the ability of players to understand the level of realism they are simulating. This is obviously just Slamdance making a really dumb decision at a very poor time. If they would have refused the game in the getgo, well, then they'd have to come up with a pretty good reason why and I think they didn't feel like doing so as it might impede on their slamdanciness, so to speak.
Here's a question: What if this were called Super Columbine Simulator, instead of RPG? Too Soon?
It's so good to see that the delegation of priorities regarding Human Rights has now moved Robot one notch above Dark Skinned Human.
Thankfully, it's still one notch below Canine.
Well it is unplausible.
We've been hearing this "Every Household has a Robot by 2000" crap since the early 80's. Theoretically it all depends how you define "Robot". Things like the Scooba: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scooba are basically flat little R2-D2's that roll around the house sucking up your craplets while avoiding walls. I guarantee you'll see more of these in the corporate sectors ala the mouse droids running from growling Wookiees.
As far as Robby the Robot or the little girl from Small Wonder (remember her?) forget it. There is no practical application of owning a protocol type droid unless you are elderly, disabled, and don't get on with humans very well. I mean, how feasible is it to pay $5000+ dollars to order your droid to fetch you another beer while you sit on your ass watching Deal or No Deal?
The argument may be, spouses or siblings are far more expensive and often question the beer fetching with their limited albiet effective logic and reasoning ability (pesky humans), but the praticality of a fully functioning human depending on a questionably functioning Microsoft Robot is dim. After awhile that fetch droid becomes that cool massager/remote control chair you bought at Sharper Image years ago that's now sitting in the basement collecting spider webs.
And a Microsoft robot? Sheesh!
It's all fun and games until Microsoft Nanny crashes mid-stairwell and drops granny to her doom.
In Soviet Russia, drugs patent you!
Thanks for the assist ;)
From the article: "One United employee appeared emotionally shaken by the sighting and "experienced some religious issues" over it, one co-worker said."
Thank Jesus!
Send... more... UFO's!
Prepare yourselves for a digitally inserted, blue glowy River Phoenix.
Tremble before the mind blowing revelation when Sean Connery announces to the Nazis, "I am the Senate!"
And witness the incredible love scenes between a reunited Indiana and Marion Ravenwood, "I hate snakes. They're slimy, scaly, and they get everywhere. Not like here, where everything is... wrinkley and aging."
"DieHard is a piece of software which helps programs to run correctly and protects them from a range of security vulnerabilities. " So it's basically a Tron program?