Taliban removed from game

[Fallbreeze]

A rose, or a military group, by any other name...still gets shot at. I think it would just cause the developers more of a headache with programming if they try to do stuff like that.

[Heraclius]

What is the difference between a war 60 [or in the case of Black Ops anywhere from 60 to 20] years ago and a war going on today? They are both wars, and time should not have an effect on anything at all concerning their effects on the world as we know it. There are plenty of games based on modern combat [Call of Duty for instance] that haven't gotten any flak for their use of Arab terrorists in the game. In Call of Duty 4 and Modern Warfare 2 you can play as the "OpFor" in multiplayer. The OpFor is basically the Taliban and everybody knows it.

[japanpimp]

I think the line needs to be drawn outside of the video game, not inside. What I mean is, decisions need to be made as to what types of video games developers should be allowed to make. Sure, people should have freedom to do what they want. But laws are made (decisions) which place boundaries on our freedoms for the overall good of all. For example, people are not free to commit crimes. And in war opposing forces are not free to use whatever weapons and war tactics they want. Its called the Geneva Convention. Laws are also made on what types of drugs, food and entertainment are allowed. Laws are also made so that bad language is not spoken on TV. So laws need to be made as to what type of video games are allowed as well. Like no KKK, rape and graphic war games. Lines (i.e. laws) need to be drawn around video games as they are entertainment. And various lines are already drawn around existing forms of entertainment. So why not Video Games?

[King Dylan]

JP, your missing the point of video games. You play them to have fun. That's it. It's entertainment. Your over thinking it.

[Heraclius]

Besides what is the difference between a Graphic M rated game with lots of blood and gore and an R rate slasher film? Why should the former not be allowed the the latter be when they both have the same content [arguably the film has worse].

I say we draw a line with movies and completely eliminate horror, slasher, and violent war movies as well. While we are at it lets ban novels that deal with violence too. You know things like Band of Brothers and War and Peace deal with violence in a way, so they should be banned as well. Oh and we can't forget ****ography [though that one I might support in actuality].

You cannot selectively limit one form of entertainment without doing the same to all the others JP. If you would, fans of the limited one would cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war for sure, and a violent movie can have the same effect as a violent video game. They are both limited to a certain age group though, and it is the parent's responsibility to limit what their child it exposed to, not the governments.

[japanpimp]

Besides what is the difference between a Graphic M rated game with lots of blood and gore and an R rate slasher film? Why should the former not be allowed the the latter be when they both have the same content [arguably the film has worse].

I say we draw a line with movies and completely eliminate horror, slasher, and violent war movies as well. While we are at it lets ban novels that deal with violence too. You know things like Band of Brothers and War and Peace deal with violence in a way, so they should be banned as well. Oh and we can't forget ****ography [though that one I might support in actuality].

You cannot selectively limit one form of entertainment without doing the same to all the others JP. If you would, fans of the limited one would cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war for sure, and a violent movie can have the same effect as a violent video game. They are both limited to a certain age group though, and it is the parent's responsibility to limit what their child it exposed to, not the governments.

C'mon Hers, you can't put video games on the same level as movies and books. Video games engage the individual, make them play stuff out. It is a whole nother level. I do not agree that what applies to video games applies to movies.
Say you watch a movie about rape and murder, no big deal, right? Then you watch someone do it in real life. Then you do it yourself. A video game is somewhere between the movie and doing the act yourself. Because you are acting it out in a virtual world. So anything in virtual reality is OK?

[Moghedien]

Say you watch a movie about rape and murder, no big deal, right? Then you watch someone do it in real life. Then you do it yourself. A video game is somewhere between the movie and doing the act yourself. Because you are acting it out in a virtual world. So anything in virtual reality is OK?

A video game is not real even if its a virtual world. Just because you shoot up a airport for example in modern warfare II does not mean you are not on the next step to being a mass murderer. Most people can diffrentiate between reality and a video game.

[Heraclius]

Moghedien has it right there, the level of interaction is not important by any means, what is important is the ability to differentiate between the virtual and the real.

Just because you play as the Taliban in a video game does not mean you are on the fast track to becoming an Insurgent. Shooting up an airport in Modern Warfare 2 does not make you a Russian Terrorist, just like watching an violent antagonist rip someone's arm off in a slasher movie does not make you prone to becoming a sociopath.

I do agree on one point though, there should be some lines in place on all forms of entertain concerning things sexual in nature. You shouldn't be able to play a video-game where you can rape a women, and you shouldn't be able to watch a women getting raped on the internet or in a movie either.

But your rape example is far out of touch with the point of this thread which was concerning the Taliban being playable in a game. It is a matter of little consequence, it doesn't involve controversial actions [like the airport in MW2], it doesn't involve sex, and it doesn't involve mass violence. It is merely a name, and names don't matter.

[Demonhero]

This argument is foolish. The vocal minority are all lining up with foolish arguments against video games.

Let's look at it this way:
I am a gamer. I play all kinds of gory games. I have had violent tendencies since long before I ever touched a violent game. I read violent books. I watch violent movies. Violence is a part of my life, and has been since I was a toddler. Yet, I don't like violence and conflict. Therefore, I am clearly corrupted by all the media, right? My thoughts have been subverted by all of it? No.

No matter the type of input, no matter the level of interaction, no matter any damned variable you like, media can only make us do things to the same extent that other people can. Its about having something called common sense. Its about having morals.

Having Taliban in Medal Of Honor would have been no big deal. When you play multiplayer games like that, you don't support what faction your team is. You support the people who make up your team. You get mad not at the what faction the enemy team is, you get mad at the people who make up the team. Nobody is going to be playing that game online, and their characters be the Taliban, and start losing and say "Oh my god. I hate the Americans. I'm going to kill them all." They're going to either curse the players of the enemy team, or the players of their own team.

Why in **** should the name of a character skin matter?

This is the most ****ing pointless thing to argue about. Ever. Might as well start arguing about whether or not we should stop people from saying those things, in case saying the name inspires people to support their cause.

Really.

Someone quote this whole post to make sure JP sees it, because most of it is directed him.

Hera, I agree with you on all your points. Going all out against one type of media, and none of the rest is called "Wang envy." The video game companies rake in billions. Naturally, they want to obstruct the games which bring in the most money. Whether those obstructionists realize it or not, that's exactly what's happening, and they're being led right along.

[Rota]

This argument is foolish. The vocal minority are all lining up with foolish arguments against video games.

Let's look at it this way:
I am a gamer. I play all kinds of gory games. I have had violent tendencies since long before I ever touched a violent game. I read violent books. I watch violent movies. Violence is a part of my life, and has been since I was a toddler. Yet, I don't like violence and conflict. Therefore, I am clearly corrupted by all the media, right? My thoughts have been subverted by all of it? No.

No matter the type of input, no matter the level of interaction, no matter any damned variable you like, media can only make us do things to the same extent that other people can. Its about having something called common sense. Its about having morals.

Having Taliban in Medal Of Honor would have been no big deal. When you play multiplayer games like that, you don't support what faction your team is. You support the people who make up your team. You get mad not at the what faction the enemy team is, you get mad at the people who make up the team. Nobody is going to be playing that game online, and their characters be the Taliban, and start losing and say "Oh my god. I hate the Americans. I'm going to kill them all." They're going to either curse the players of the enemy team, or the players of their own team.

Why in **** should the name of a character skin matter?

This is the most ****ing pointless thing to argue about. Ever. Might as well start arguing about whether or not we should stop people from saying those things, in case saying the name inspires people to support their cause.

Really.

Someone quote this whole post to make sure JP sees it, because most of it is directed him.

Hera, I agree with you on all your points. Going all out against one type of media, and none of the rest is called "Wang envy." The video game companies rake in billions. Naturally, they want to obstruct the games which bring in the most money. Whether those obstructionists realize it or not, that's exactly what's happening, and they're being led right along.

Someone quote this whole post to make sure JP sees it, because most of it is directed him.

Request granted.