Sign in to follow this  
Warsong

Politically incorrect games fun?

Recommended Posts

Politically incorrect games fun? Would you say a politically innocent game is fun? You have Politically incorrect radio, TV, movies, or news sometimes so why not games? Why not has a game like a movie in how the main focus of the game is to hunt gay people? Or how about having a politically incorrect game and attacking Arabs like the game Metal Slugs does? Freedom of speech and expression should allow people to make them right? It would not cause controversy if the story is totally off by saying impossible thing like taking on Aliens. It’s ok to attack Nazis since they lost the war and are bad. But what if you hire actual historians and turn a game into a political history lesson that will offend people like attacking the Muslim or Catholic religion? Or attacking political parties, political views, ethnicities, occupations. I think many would want those types of games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by WarsongIt’s ok to attack Nazis since they lost the war and are bad.


Actually it's ok to attack Nazis because they exterminated 6 million Jews and started a war that killed tens of millions. There's a difference between Nazis and the other groups you mentioned like Catholics generally or Muslims generally. A BIG difference.

What company would want to produce a game where you gun down Catholics like you do aliens in other games? You'd be labeled the Hate Crimes Corp. Just because there's a "market" for all kinds of hate, that doesn't mean it's right to cater to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by WarsongWhy not has a game like a movie in how the main focus of the game is to hunt gay people? Or how about having a politically incorrect game and attacking Arabs like the game Metal Slugs does? Freedom of speech and expression should allow people to make them right?


Yes, freedom of speech lets you do what you like. Then the freedom of the market will crush your idea like a bug. Imagine the protests and bad press from a game that specifically focused on killing gay people. You might sell some games because of the controversy but overall, most retailers would refuse to carry such a product. Heck, you might even get the government involved if you took it far enough. Plus, the people making such a game would be seriously crossing an ethical and moral line that the industry is already occasionally dancing on. Any company that pursued this path would basically be making products for the skinhead scene. And that's just messed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Ned_K
What company would want to produce a game where you gun down Catholics like you do aliens in other games? You'd be labeled the Hate Crimes Corp. Just because there's a "market" for all kinds of hate, that doesn't mean it's right to cater to it.


Although I don't think anyone should make a spiteful game for spite's sake, if there is a market for something, by all means cater to it. If you don't, someone else will. Just... don't be surprised when you can't sleep at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:

What company would want to produce a game where you gun down Catholics like you do aliens in other games?


Probably the same company that did titles like "state of emergency" and "BMX XXX".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it would be best to cater to as many gamers as possible - a larger market means more potential sales. Sure, there are market niches for every type of game, but look at the success of Halo2 and the first Halo for that matter. It's a solid FPS that appeals to a larger variety of gamers. Due to the large market of gamers the game appeals to, Halo2's preorder was over a million copies.

How many copies do you think a publisher could count from a "politically incorrect" games, a hundred thousand? Maybe, at best, or possibly only a few thousand gamers would buy it. I don't think a publisher would even waste their money marketing a game that would only sell a couple thousand copies, or even a couple ten-thousand copies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The definitions of right and wrong are decided by society at large. As such, targeting one particular ethnic group in a multi-cultural society tends to create some resentment in a region were tensions can sometimes become strained. Some poeple can look at blantant racism, or crudness in a game and simply laugh at the sillyness of it all, others get their pitchforks and start screaming for blood.

There are examples of some games that have danced that line already, like Postal 1 and 2, which feature the killing of arabs, country hics with homosexual tendancies, a perverse form of environmentalists, Parents Against Violence (who ironicly are quite violent in the game), Meat Packers, Police Officers, postal workers, and the list goes on and on. The Postal series was banned from a number of countries, canada among them because of its violent content. Although the game primarily exists because its creators felt that violence belongs in video games, not in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by GyrthokAlthough the game primarily exists because its creators felt that violence belongs in video games, not in real life.


The game existed because they thought they could make some money off it. There was no other reason.


Would a game where you gained points by raping women be ok because it creators felt that "rape belongs in video games, not in real life"?

Personally, I'm ok with violence in video games, as long as it doesn't target specific ethnic groups, religions, etc. But, I know that it's possible to go to far. Start making games about killing Jews or raping kids and you've gone too far. Period. Do people have a RIGHT to make such games? Yes, to a point. But there start to be consequences beyond bad sales when you express your free speech in certain ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by GyrthokThe definitions of right and wrong are decided by society at large.


Almost, but not entirely. We also have laws to protect the minority. That's part of the definition of democracy, namely, that it includes protection of minority rights. Otherwise you just have a rabble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IMO, making something just because you think you can get rich off of it is wrong. Which means a lot of big video game companies are on my bad list too, heh.

Come to think of it, why not make fun of this factor? Make a game where you have to search out famous people, break into their houses, and steal their underwear or sex toys or turds, which you then sell for big bucks to people who have nothing better to do than be obsessed with celebrities. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by onyxflame
IMO, making something just because you think you can get rich off of it is wrong.
Let me take a stab in the dark and assume that you don't believe in capitalism ;)

Quote:
Original post by Warsong
Why not has a game like a movie in how the main focus of the game is to hunt gay people? Or how about having a politically incorrect game and attacking Arabs like the game Metal Slugs does?
Metal Slug is even worse than you think, you actually end up joining forces with the Nazis in the end. But then again so did the Finns and nobody gave them any crap about it, I guess you can justify a lot of dubvious alliances with "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Let me take a stab in the dark and assume that you don't believe in capitalism ;)


I could concievably get rich by sticking straws with puppets on the end of them up my nostrils and having a nose puppet show, but why would I *want* to? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Err, anyone ever heard of GTA?

Of course politically incorrect games can be fun and popular.

There are also countless insanely popular and very politically incorrect Flash games all over the web.

I don't see what the big deal is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Pxtl
Two words:

Sim Auschwitz.

Discuss.


Basically you summed up the issue. There's a difference between "politically incorrect" and fundamentally hateful material. A game like Sim Auschwitz, where your goal would be, perhaps, to maximize the through-put of processing Jews would be so sick as to be indefensible. Period. Would it be illegal? No. But groups like the Aryan Nations can post their hate on the web legally as well. It doesn't make them a "niche market."

Some people here, including the original poster, have (purposefully?) muddied the waters on the line between what is simply "politically incorrect" and what is deemed fundamentally sick and morally bereft of any redeeming value by 99% of society. There IS a difference.

If someone feels that a game about killing Jews or Catholics or Muslims (simply because they ARE Jewish or Catholic or Muslim) would fill a market niche and that it is therefore ok to make such a game based on the capitalistic notions of the "market is always right" or "let the market decide," then that person needs to go back and make an effort to understand what personal ethics and morals even are. Because they obviously have no idea. Just because something can make you some money doesn't mean you should do it. If child porn is legal in some third world country and you realize you could make a LOT of money by moving there and making such material, is it justified simply in the name of "the market"? Of course not. It's a morally inexcusable pursuit no matter the reason you give.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
Quote:
Original post by Spoonster
Err, anyone ever heard of GTA?

Of course politically incorrect games can be fun and popular.

There are also countless insanely popular and very politically incorrect Flash games all over the web.

I don't see what the big deal is


Because "politically incorrect" is the WRONG LABEL for a lot of what is being proposed. Please take a minute to read over some of the ideas being tossed around. We're far beyond simple poltical incorrectness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
The game existed because they thought they could make some money off it. There was no other reason.


Its nice to see that you can distort the facts to fit your perception of the world. If you'll scroll back up and actually read, you'll see that the game was banned in a number of countries, so obviously they didn't make alot of money off it. Now you could say "oh, but they made money off the initial sales". Well Postal 1 was similarly banned, yet they made a sequel, now obviously that sequel would have been banned before it was ever released given the content of Postal 1. Seems to lead credit to their desire to die penniless hobo's.. >.>

Quote:
Almost, but not entirely. We also have laws to protect the minority. That's part of the definition of democracy, namely, that it includes protection of minority rights. Otherwise you just have a rabble.


Democracy is not above corruption, and those laws are also a product of society. Fact is, a society can isolate minorities, either out of fear (Muslum Terroists), or out of political rivalry (Pakistan/Israel, Russia/Chechnia). Even democracy here in the West is strained sometimes with Native American's, Gay couples, and many others. It doesn't take much to skew and warp ones views enough to produce a Nazi Germany, or an Iraqi dictatorship. Any society, much like the people who create it, isn't perfect.

Quote:
Actually it's ok to attack Nazis because they exterminated 6 million Jews and started a war that killed tens of millions. There's a difference between Nazis and the other groups you mentioned like Catholics generally or Muslims generally. A BIG difference.


Big difference? I guess you skipped history in school, or you would have noticed the large number of people murdered during the Witch Trials and Inquisition in the middle ages by the Christans. They did the same thing the Nazi's did, dissassociating a particular group (in this case Witches) as being the 'enemy' for one reason or another, and proceeded to ruthlessly kill them in a genocidal fasion, among others (The Kathars). Not to mention that today, Muslims go on suicidal Terrorist assaults demonizing the 'West' as greedy heretics, World Trade Center anyone? And don't even get me started on mental institutions run by the Catholic Church during the 1950's and 1960's.

None of these groups are free of blood on their hands, and singling one out over another is simply a matter of preference.
The Act of Disassociation is a common tool used by the Righteous and Dictator's alike to justify violence and genocide, its all a matter of perspective..

"Be careful not to become the evil you choose to fight."
http://www.freedommag.org/english/canada/reports/page01.htm

[Edited by - Gyrthok on November 12, 2004 1:28:09 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Its nice to see that you can distort the facts to fit your perception of the world. If you'll scroll back up and actually read, you'll see that the game was banned in a number of countries, so obviously they didn't make alot of money off it. Now you could say "oh, but they made money off the initial sales". Well Postal 1 was similarly banned, yet they made a sequel, seems to lead credit to their desire to die penniless hobo's.. >.>

Wrong, it's nice to see you don't understand why games are even made. They are made to make money. Period. They gambled that the money made would be worth the controversy or even enhanced by it. The fact that countries banned the game AFTER THE FACT has no bearing on anything. In fact, it reinforces my point that there are CONSEQUENCES for choosing such a path.

EDIT ADD: Making a sequel knowing that the first got banned in some countries is STILL nothing more than a market driven decision.

Quote:
Democracy is not above corruption, and those laws are also a product of society. Fact is, a society can isolate minorities, either out of fear (Muslum Terroists), or out of political rivalry (Pakistan/Israel, Russia/Chechnia). Even democracy here in the West is strained sometimes with Native American's, Gay couples, and many others. It doesn't take much to skew and warp ones views enough to produce a Nazi Germany, or an Iraqi dictatorship. Any society, much like the people who create it, isn't perfect.

And so what's your point? Of course no system is "perfect". That doesn't mean that protection of minority rights isn't a normative feature of democracy in general simply because we sometimes fall short. Pakistan is not a democracy. Your example has no bearing on my comment. Chechnya is not a democracy (Russia's claims not withstanding). Your example again has no bearing on my comment. You are pointing out that sometimes in democracies minority rights don't get enforced the way they should. Um, ok. So what's your point and how does your response have anything to do with my comment to which you were responding?

Quote:
Big difference? I guess you skipped history in school, or you would have noticed the large number of people murdered during the Witch Trials and Inquisition in the middle ages by the Christans. They did the same thing the Nazi's did, dissassociating a particular group (in this case Witches) as being the 'enemy' for one reason or another, and proceeded to ruthlessly kill them in a genocidal fasion, among others (The Kathars). Not to mention that today, Muslims go on suicidal Terrorist assaults demonizing the 'West' as greedy heretics, World Trade Center anyone? And don't even get me started on mental institutions run by the Catholic Church during the 1950's and 1960's.

Once you start going back hundreds of years you begin to muddy the waters. Is your average Catholic today in any way associated with witch trials 400 years ago? No. If you make a game about killing religious zealots who were hunting innocent people, that would be one thing. If you make a game about killing Catholics today, that's another altogether. Nazism was a movement that existed recently. We are still seeing images of it every day on TV. There was a show on the concentration camps just in the last day or so on the Discovery or History channel or one of those education networks. It is still routinely invoked in political discussion.
There are 1 billion Muslims. There are thousands of terrorists. Again you try to distort the facts in order to justify hateful material somehow have relevance. Or what IS your point aanyway? You bring up Catholic mental institutions...why? Lots of crap has been done by lots of groups. If you give an example of some black group, the Panthers for example, doing something bad, does that mean you can then paint all blacks with that? Did all Catholics know about abuses in some mental institutions back in the 50's? No. In fact, almost no one but the people running them did. In any event, comparing Catholic mental institutions of the 50's to Nazi concentration camps is a non-starter for your position, whatever that position may actually be.

Quote:
None of these groups are free of blood on their hands, and singling one out over another is simply a matter of preference.

No, it's more than that and you are simply hiding behind obfuscation.

[Edited by - Ned_K on November 12, 2004 2:50:09 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
Just as a note, although Stalin was considered "a good guy" during the WWII, he killed and/or starved to death more people than any other dictator in the history, including Hitler. And those were his own peope, russians, not an ethnic group selected as an enemy to scare the public (jews back then or muslims today).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Ned_K
Quote:
Original post by Pxtl
Two words:

Sim Auschwitz.

Discuss.


Basically you summed up the issue. There's a difference between "politically incorrect" and fundamentally hateful material. A game like Sim Auschwitz, where your goal would be, perhaps, to maximize the through-put of processing Jews would be so sick as to be indefensible.


Agreed - this thread isn't about "political incorectness" - its about racism and ethnic cleansing. Still, I personally putting the player in the shoes of evil can teach the player something - how people justify the unthinkable. Consider that every act of national atrocity requires millions to be complicit in the act, and its important to understand how things come about. Too quickly people discard men like Hitler or Kim Jong Il to be inhuman monsters, when the problem is that they were/are human monsters. At some point they were normal humans, and somehow decided it would be expedient to commit atrocities. Play "Sid Meier's Colonization" - or any of the Sid Meier games - and see how people can justify martial law, or in Colonization's case, keeping the natives around as helpful allies until they get in the way, then wiping their primitive asses out. Perhaps a "Sim Concentration Camp" would be good - one where the player can be an Oscar Schindler or a Dr. Mengele, and will be punished/rewarded before, during, and after the war according to his behaviour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Anonymous Poster
Just as a note, although Stalin was considered "a good guy" during the WWII, he killed and/or starved to death more people than any other dictator in the history, including Hitler. And those were his own peope, russians, not an ethnic group selected as an enemy to scare the public (jews back then or muslims today).


Very true. Sometimes nations are in a position to have to deal with such people as a matter of survival. That is not the position being discussed here, however, nor is it really the topic. Post-modern relavitism DOES seem to be the guiding light for a number of people in this thread but your example is of of a different stripe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Pxtl
Quote:
Original post by Ned_K
Quote:
Original post by Pxtl
Two words:

Sim Auschwitz.

Discuss.


Basically you summed up the issue. There's a difference between "politically incorrect" and fundamentally hateful material. A game like Sim Auschwitz, where your goal would be, perhaps, to maximize the through-put of processing Jews would be so sick as to be indefensible.


Agreed - this thread isn't about "political incorectness" - its about racism and ethnic cleansing. Still, I personally putting the player in the shoes of evil can teach the player something - how people justify the unthinkable. Consider that every act of national atrocity requires millions to be complicit in the act, and its important to understand how things come about. Too quickly people discard men like Hitler or Kim Jong Il to be inhuman monsters, when the problem is that they were/are human monsters. At some point they were normal humans, and somehow decided it would be expedient to commit atrocities. Play "Sid Meier's Colonization" - or any of the Sid Meier games - and see how people can justify martial law, or in Colonization's case, keeping the natives around as helpful allies until they get in the way, then wiping their primitive asses out. Perhaps a "Sim Concentration Camp" would be good - one where the player can be an Oscar Schindler or a Dr. Mengele, and will be punished/rewarded before, during, and after the war according to his behaviour.


I agree up to a point but again, the original poster, and those defending him tend to be putting forward a type of game that doesn't exist to TEACH but to cater to a gleeful extermination of particular ethnic, religious, and political groups in order to capture that market "niche". If they had framed their ideas as you are framing yours then the issue being discussed would be very different. Having a game called "Sim Auschwitz" just for the sake of it as opposed to having such a game to try to teach some moral lesson (a VERY questionable and tenuous idea at best I might add) are two different things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Ned_K
Quote:
Original post by Anonymous Poster
Just as a note, although Stalin was considered "a good guy" during the WWII, he killed and/or starved to death more people than any other dictator in the history, including Hitler. And those were his own peope, russians, not an ethnic group selected as an enemy to scare the public (jews back then or muslims today).


Very true. Sometimes nations are in a position to have to deal with such people as a matter of survival. That is not the position being discussed here, however, nor is it really the topic. Post-modern relavitism DOES seem to be the guiding light for a number of people in this thread but your example is of of a different stripe.


As a note though...How many games were there between 1985 - 1989~1995 where the bad guys were Russians. Back then it was ok to kill russians for the sole point of being russian. This was do to the fact that the USSR were our primary rivals in the world and were seen in a pretty black and white way. I.E. We were good, they were evil.

On the topic of Nazi-ism. Germany was ripe for the rise of the Nazi party due to the fact of economic hardships brought on by the treaty that ended WWI. There was also a need to reclaim national pride that was lost after Germany's surrender. The country was looking for someone to blame, and that someone ended up being the Jews. However, the common nazi soldier and party member in Germany didn't know about the concentration camps, nor about the mass killing of Jews. Nor did they really care. This doesn't make them evil, nor does it make the innocent. IT is just the case. However the attrocities of the leadership and elite units of the German Nazi Party definately paints the entire nazi party as one that is entirely evil. This is something that has been grasped both by the Allies and in and the white spremacy groups across the country that idolize them.

Nazi party EVIL? Yes.
Every Nazi Evil? No.

Communism evil? Yes and No.
Communist evil? No
Communist dictator evil...most likely yes.


However the point of everything is that political incorrectness does sell in minor forms like BMX XXX and GTA but these are PIC games that appeal to a large audience. However Hate Games which the original poster commented on do not sell for the mainstream audience. If someone is very interested in games made like kill the jews there is a market out there and games have been made just for that purpose. There are hate lables out there for those games, just as there is for Hate Rap, Hate magazines etc. But they are definately NOT main stream.

There are of course people on the far left of the PC business. These are the people who claimed that Star Wars EP2 and LOTR were both racist...so I doubt that you can create a game now a days that doesn't offend someone in some way shape or form.

I'd personally like to see a SIM BUTCHER PLANT just to offend the PETA guys but thats my own opinion :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
-The point i'm trying to make is that Ethics and Morality is Relative, and subject to change. As such, a game being labeled "Politically Incorrect" or reprehensible is a matter of perspective, or ones opinion.

People can design and make games to help make a point, or to express their own views or beliefs, or simply for enjoyment. They then give them to companies to help distribute them, and those companies sell them for money. The drive to create such a game does not neccessarily have to be for money, but for the passion that its designer(s) have towards making it. There's alot of freeware games that are being made out there today that prove this. Games are a new medium, akin to Books, and Movies, its understandable that certain negative concepts will be expressed in them at one point or another.

-The point of my bringing up Nazi Concentration Camps, and Catholic run Orphanages is in response to your comment that its "alright to kill Nazi's", and that there's "a big difference between Nazi's and Catholics". I wasn't the one to originally make the reference between the two, if you bothered to read the link at the bottom of my last post. It shows that it doesn't matter what system of government you use, be it a dictatorship, or a Democracy, both are capable of attrocities.

Minorities, such as terrorists, small groups of abusive clergy,
Political Parties in control of a particular country, can cause people to generalize populations and lump them together. The most sophisticated survailance system being used in Nazi Germany during both World Wars wasn't used on the allies, it was used to control Germany's own population. There were some German's who dissagreed with Hitlers views, and there were some who had no choice but to fight because they were drafted into his army, with death as their only alternative, fearful that friends and family might turn them in. Even then soldiers and high ranking officials worked in secret to save lives. An excelent example of this is the movie "Shindler's List".

My point is, that i find it hypocritical that you condone attacks against Nazi's in general even though there were poeple forced into service who opposed the Nazi political party, and yet not make the same sweeping generalizations towards Catholics for similiar attrocities committed by Catholic Institutions.

Quote:
Actually it's ok to attack Nazis because they exterminated 6 million Jews and started a war that killed tens of millions. There's a difference between Nazis and the other groups you mentioned like Catholics generally or Muslims generally. A BIG difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this