6 ms·

This genuinely baffles me. Who cares! It's a video game. It's pixels on a screen. True crime podcasts and movies are a-okay but when its a video game that's whe

by bfg_9k 1y ago

This genuinely baffles me. Who cares! It's a video game. It's pixels on a screen. True crime podcasts and movies are a-okay but when its a video game that's where the line is drawn?

ronjakoi 1y ago
I think it's about the simulation and agency that video games afford the consumer.
josephg 1y ago
I suspect all new frontiers are like this. There was probably a similar outcry over violence in films. And maybe violence in fictional books too. Both long lost from living memory. It does feel different in a video game, because you're the one pulling the trigger. I played that CoD mission when the game came out, and I felt a bit sick in my stomach playing that mission out. But I'd probably have exactly the same feeling from violence in films if I wasn't so desensitised to it after growing up watching american movies and tv shows. Its just new.
- ashoeafoot 1y ago
  Now i imagine control concerned mothers rallying against papyrus which ruins the youth for healthy outdoor activities like warfare, sieges and murder.
0xcafefood 1y ago
There are still taboos even for pixels on a screen, even for video games. It's a good thing. There should be. Perhaps you're just saying that you're mostly comfortable with the depiction of some forms of violence in some contexts. But what about other scenarios though? Would you feel the same about a game where the player runs around raping women, or capturing and lynching escaped slaves? It's just pixels!
- roenxi 1y ago
  > Would you feel the same about a game where the player runs around raping women, or capturing and lynching escaped slaves? It's just pixels! Yeah. Same thing. Should be ignored. If someone feels an urge to run around raping women and lynching slaves, I'd much rather they were sitting around at home playing videogames than doing anything else in their spare time. What do you want them to be doing, the traditional creep move of figuring out how to get into positions of power and influence? In addition taxpayers shouldn't be footing the bill in the war on pixels; if the banks are taking a firm moral stand then clearly the government is involved and that means they're probably spending money on expunging victimless non-crimes which is a low.
- vunderba 1y ago
  What if it's a story but with very detailed descriptions? What if that short story is adapted into a video game but it's only a text adventure? What if we add artwork to it, but it's just pixel art? etc etc. The ability and the freedom to explore the darkest parts of our psyche in a safe, controlled, and fictitious environment IS important. Even if we find certain aspects or fetishes repugnant and distasteful. I find the idea that payment processors have enough power to dictate the morality of a game market concerning. Given the number of other NSFW fetishistic stuff that is still being permitted on Steam I don't buy the "chargeback" rational AT ALL.
- ErrorNoBrain 1y ago
  I disagree. there shouldnt be any taboos for pixels on a screen i mean, i can understand a child porn game would be disallowed but we already have anime games where characters that look like children are nearly naked
- Levitz 1y ago
  >But what about other scenarios though? Would you feel the same about a game where the player runs around raping women, or capturing and lynching escaped slaves? Yes and yes. We have worse stuff in literature already.
- ThrowawayR2 1y ago
  What do you think is occurring when a player defeats one of the other cultures in Civilization by conquering their last city or conducts orbital bombardment on a enemy planet in Master of Orion until the population is zero? That's genocide as gameplay. It _is_ just pixels.
- mbs159 1y ago
  > Would you feel the same about a game where the player runs around raping women, or capturing and lynching escaped slaves? It's just pixels! If we are already okay with mass murder in video games, then absolutely yes.
  - 0xcafefood 1y ago
    I'd go the other way and say mass murder shouldn't be acceptable in video games either. Not every country does allow that.
Mikhail_Edoshin 1y ago
But your heart is not pixels.
whycome 1y ago
You’re risking potential revenue.
kelseyfrog 1y ago
The people who care signed their names[1]. It's not a secret or anything. Most of the signatories are associated with Australian anti sex trafficking and exploitation groups, although there are several UK signatories and a couple Americans. A publication[2] by one of the signatories connects the dots. It's driven by the core idea: "Pornography Use Shapes and Changes Sexual Tastes"[3] which is supported by "In a survey of men involved in online sexual activities, 47% reported being involved in practice or seeing pornography which previously was not interesting to or even disgusted them."[4] I'm trying to steelman when I say I believe that the authors would agree that this also applies to games with sexual content. To address your comment specifically, while I see the appeal of consistent moral framework. I personally believe that moral frameworks trade consistency for completeness and rarely accomplish either. You have to assume the value-perspective of the other in order to understand why consistency might take a back seat to some other value we could only speculate on. 1. https://www.collectiveshout.org/open-letter-to-payment-processors https://www.collectiveshout.org/open-letter-to-payment-proce... 2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391732869_Not_A_Fantasy_How_the_Pornography_Industry_Exploits_Image-based_Sexual_Abuse_in_Real_Life#pf14 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391732869_Not_A_Fan... 3. ibid. pg 30 4. ibid
- mango7283 1y ago
  It really should be obvious that the natural objection to "if they banned this then why not X" is "they haven't gotten around to it yet" and that the reason they can be more successful is also that they have put their money where their mouth is and also named themselves, something a counter petition will probably struggle with.
  - kelseyfrog 1y ago
    Trying to connect the dots here. GP mentioned also banning true-crime podcasts and you comment to that was "they haven't gotten around to it yet"? How defensible do you feel this position is?
    - mango7283 1y ago

by bfg_9k 1y ago

This genuinely baffles me. Who cares! It's a video game. It's pixels on a screen. True crime podcasts and movies are a-okay but when its a video game that's where the line is drawn?

ronjakoi 1y ago

I think it's about the simulation and agency that video games afford the consumer.

josephg 1y ago

I suspect all new frontiers are like this. There was probably a similar outcry over violence in films. And maybe violence in fictional books too. Both long lost from living memory. It does feel different in a video game, because you're the one pulling the trigger. I played that CoD mission when the game came out, and I felt a bit sick in my stomach playing that mission out. But I'd probably have exactly the same feeling from violence in films if I wasn't so desensitised to it after growing up watching american movies and tv shows. Its just new.

ashoeafoot 1y ago
Now i imagine control concerned mothers rallying against papyrus which ruins the youth for healthy outdoor activities like warfare, sieges and murder.

0xcafefood 1y ago

There are still taboos even for pixels on a screen, even for video games. It's a good thing. There should be. Perhaps you're just saying that you're mostly comfortable with the depiction of some forms of violence in some contexts. But what about other scenarios though? Would you feel the same about a game where the player runs around raping women, or capturing and lynching escaped slaves? It's just pixels!

roenxi 1y ago
> Would you feel the same about a game where the player runs around raping women, or capturing and lynching escaped slaves? It's just pixels! Yeah. Same thing. Should be ignored. If someone feels an urge to run around raping women and lynching slaves, I'd much rather they were sitting around at home playing videogames than doing anything else in their spare time. What do you want them to be doing, the traditional creep move of figuring out how to get into positions of power and influence? In addition taxpayers shouldn't be footing the bill in the war on pixels; if the banks are taking a firm moral stand then clearly the government is involved and that means they're probably spending money on expunging victimless non-crimes which is a low.
vunderba 1y ago
What if it's a story but with very detailed descriptions? What if that short story is adapted into a video game but it's only a text adventure? What if we add artwork to it, but it's just pixel art? etc etc. The ability and the freedom to explore the darkest parts of our psyche in a safe, controlled, and fictitious environment IS important. Even if we find certain aspects or fetishes repugnant and distasteful. I find the idea that payment processors have enough power to dictate the morality of a game market concerning. Given the number of other NSFW fetishistic stuff that is still being permitted on Steam I don't buy the "chargeback" rational AT ALL.
ErrorNoBrain 1y ago
I disagree. there shouldnt be any taboos for pixels on a screen i mean, i can understand a child porn game would be disallowed but we already have anime games where characters that look like children are nearly naked
Levitz 1y ago
>But what about other scenarios though? Would you feel the same about a game where the player runs around raping women, or capturing and lynching escaped slaves? Yes and yes. We have worse stuff in literature already.
ThrowawayR2 1y ago
What do you think is occurring when a player defeats one of the other cultures in Civilization by conquering their last city or conducts orbital bombardment on a enemy planet in Master of Orion until the population is zero? That's genocide as gameplay. It _is_ just pixels.
mbs159 1y ago
> Would you feel the same about a game where the player runs around raping women, or capturing and lynching escaped slaves? It's just pixels! If we are already okay with mass murder in video games, then absolutely yes.
- 0xcafefood 1y ago
  I'd go the other way and say mass murder shouldn't be acceptable in video games either. Not every country does allow that.

Mikhail_Edoshin 1y ago

But your heart is not pixels.

whycome 1y ago

You’re risking potential revenue.

kelseyfrog 1y ago

The people who care signed their names[1]. It's not a secret or anything. Most of the signatories are associated with Australian anti sex trafficking and exploitation groups, although there are several UK signatories and a couple Americans. A publication[2] by one of the signatories connects the dots. It's driven by the core idea: "Pornography Use Shapes and Changes Sexual Tastes"[3] which is supported by "In a survey of men involved in online sexual activities, 47% reported being involved in practice or seeing pornography which previously was not interesting to or even disgusted them."[4] I'm trying to steelman when I say I believe that the authors would agree that this also applies to games with sexual content. To address your comment specifically, while I see the appeal of consistent moral framework. I personally believe that moral frameworks trade consistency for completeness and rarely accomplish either. You have to assume the value-perspective of the other in order to understand why consistency might take a back seat to some other value we could only speculate on. 1. https://www.collectiveshout.org/open-letter-to-payment-processors https://www.collectiveshout.org/open-letter-to-payment-proce... 2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391732869_Not_A_Fantasy_How_the_Pornography_Industry_Exploits_Image-based_Sexual_Abuse_in_Real_Life#pf14 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391732869_Not_A_Fan... 3. ibid. pg 30 4. ibid

mango7283 1y ago
It really should be obvious that the natural objection to "if they banned this then why not X" is "they haven't gotten around to it yet" and that the reason they can be more successful is also that they have put their money where their mouth is and also named themselves, something a counter petition will probably struggle with.
- kelseyfrog 1y ago
  Trying to connect the dots here. GP mentioned also banning true-crime podcasts and you comment to that was "they haven't gotten around to it yet"? How defensible do you feel this position is?
  - mango7283 1y ago