Community > General chatter

Games, Games, GAMES!! (Besides iDOLM@STER, of course XD)

<< < (504/536) > >>

Logan:
There's so much ott outrage from a lot of people who weren't going to buy and play it in the first place. Just another thing to use to build up this boogeyman of ~SJW feminazis!

As someone who would probably be grouped as a ~SJW (who uses that term non ironically?), DOAX3 isn't an issue on any feminist's radar as far as I know, many see it as a "Well at least it is what it is and doesn't beat around the bush" kinda deal.

I like the DOAX games. They're tacky and cheesy, but cute.  Importing isn't that hard and I doubt the cost is going to take that much more out of someone's pockets. Such a non-issue.

Setsuna:

--- Quote from: MetalPredat0r on November 25, 2015, 04:23:10 am ---It is weird considering that the other Xtreme games were released here perfectly fine. However, while I feel the article is a bit too extreme and quick to blame SJWs, I will say it's kinda dumb and weak to not release a game to avoid controversy unless the game in question is downright offensive, which honestly I don't see a spin-off to a game already known for its sexy cheesecake moments embracing that being too offensive.

--- End quote ---

This is actually incorrect, because of the fact that internally within various classification boards and organisations (As I worked for one, being the Australian Classification board) we had a HUGE discussion re: DoAX

SWJs or whatever you call them weren't really around when people contested the original DoA Extreme, but it WAS heavily contested - mostly after release due to the fact that there was a nude skin set released for the Xbox release (Which back then was a massive scandal)

Who was pushing most of those changes in Australia? (Which was from my understanding, a worldwide effort)

The Australian Christian Lobby. Funnily enough, the tune hasn't changed all that much since then, even though the organisation pushing it changes.

DoA Extreme 2 was a funny one, because it only got a PG rating here (Quick reference, it'd be roughly a 12+, with some minor modifications) and needless to say, the lobby got involved in that one, demanding a complete ban.

Which in turn resulted in a TV appearance by a classification board member and a lobbyist on Lateline in a mini debate.

The debate was very, VERY short, since the lobbyist for the Australian Christian lobby opened really quickly with how having these women in bikinis doing poses and prancing around on a beach playing beach sports was incredibly scandalous and shouldn't be seen by anyone.

The classification board member just waited about ten minutes, and the lobbyist then asked him 'Have you got nothing to say about this epic failure of the government?'
He just smiled and said 'So I suppose we should ban all Australians from going to the beach then?'

The debate shut down so fast, because the lobbyist realised that he just painted himself into a corner he couldn't get out of. Yes, the board member said maybe four lines for a fifteen minute debate, and at least within the board, the appearance was a resounding success: The lobby and the complaints disappeared overnight.

But to say there wasn't a lot of issues relating to the games would be a lie, since as always, girls in bikinis always gets a rise out of people.

I also note that discourse re: Gaming was more structured, at least in the sense that taking an indefensible position would more likely blow you up when you rightfully got detonated by people who thought their position through. More recently, I note that a lot of emotional arguments with very little fact backed by them have been gotten away with more recently.

Also I'd note that Koei was sort of cornered into the whole sexy costume stuff for DoA5, apparently they didn't want to, and their fanbase demanded they put out more skins in regards with that. The internal discussion there was interesting, to say the least.

MetalPredat0r:
Ah, didn't know it went through that much in Australia. Then again, I hear that Australia is one of the strictest countries when it comes to video games and content.

Also, giving it more thought, at the very least the consoles it's on are region free, so if you really want those games (I honestly couldn't care less. Much rather play the fighting games) then by all means, you can import. It just makes me feel uneasy when SJWs are the supposed "reason" for the rest of the world not getting a game.

I'm also hearing counterpoints that it really doesn't matter since the games are supposedly "not that good", but what do I know. :p

Setsuna:

--- Quote from: MetalPredat0r on November 25, 2015, 04:51:52 pm ---Ah, didn't know it went through that much in Australia. Then again, I hear that Australia is one of the strictest countries when it comes to video games and content.

Also, giving it more thought, at the very least the consoles it's on are region free, so if you really want those games (I honestly couldn't care less. Much rather play the fighting games) then by all means, you can import. It just makes me feel uneasy when SJWs are the supposed "reason" for the rest of the world not getting a game.

I'm also hearing counterpoints that it really doesn't matter since the games are supposedly "not that good", but what do I know. :p

--- End quote ---

Actually, the debate was in the US as well and was actually a lot more fierce. Europe was mostly 'Eh, it's not that big a deal'.

There's a weird paradigm when it comes to gaming as a whole, at least from a classification front. You have to keep in mind the organisations that handle ratings do talk to each other, mostly because decisions elsewhere help give a ballpark for any future work.

It's an approximation but it looks something like this (For the major classifiers ESRB, CERO, PEGI and the Australian Classifications board:

Tolerance for Violence: Europe has the least tolerance, then Japan, then Australia, then the US
Tolerance for sexual themes:  the US is the least tolerant, then Australia, then Europe, then Japan
Tolerance for drug use: Australia is the most restrictive, then Japan, Europe and then the US.

Note that until relatively recently (And this is where Australia had the reputation for being very difficult access wise) Australia did not actually have an R18+ rating that was accessible (ie. You could not restrict a video game to Adults only - If you failed to make the MA15+ bar, you could not sell the game at ALL in Australia).

Also note (Because I'm very, very familiar with Australia) that Australia has a fairly low tolerance for promoting illegal acts in games if the said acts reward the player (so a game where you score points or gain in game advantages for taking illegal drugs is not allowed (This got saint's row and Fallout in trouble), where any sort of sexual violence cannot be actually depicted, and even implied gets you a R18+ (Saint's row, and Atelier Totori Plus, Meruru Plus, and New Atelier Rorona, and rape as a reward is an instant ban, as seen by Miami Hotline 2) and inciting any sort of terrorist attack will immediately get you banned (Modern Warfare 2 (or 3?) was the game that got that clause changed by parliament)

Further note that the ESRB, PEGI and CERO are NOT accountable to the governments they represent - they are private organizations. In short, if a kid grabs a game that should have been AO, Z or 18+ (US, Japan or Europe respectively) but was rated lower due to an error by the classifications body, the PUBLISHER is liable for any court case and subsequent compensation. In Australia (and a couple of other places, including Singapore and Iran), if a game SHOULD have been rated higher than it is, and say a kid gets their hands on it and suffers some sort of damage, the GOVERNMENT is on the hook, unless they can prove the publisher deliberately deceived the classifications body.

Due to the above note, we tend to be much stricter (And why we tend to chase gaming developers for well, lying on their forms) but Australia also protects the PUBLISHER due to this - If a kid got their hands on say Saints row and saw a lot of things they shouldn't, the suing party would have to prove exactly whose fault it was, since there's a chain of provable liability.

Namely:
a) The parent would have to wave their rights to the protection by willingly providing them the game (ie, by very deliberately ignoring the rating on the box and basically claiming they're too stupid to read), and yes, I've personally sat in on a case where the Judge actually asked if the plaintiff was pleading they were too stupid to read, and inquired if they'd like to release custody of their kids to the state.
b) They'd have to figure out who gave it to them (And any retailer is by LAW required to ID check for a MA 15+ game or higher, and refuse sale, on threat of a year's prison and $64000 per copy sold, and only the legal guardians can wave that check, so their grandmother bought them the game, they'd have to clear with the parents)
c) they'd have to prove that the board didn't do their job and screwed up.
d) prove that the  publisher willfully lied (by omission usually) on application to the board. (This happened with GTA: San Andreas)

Having a very defined required ruleset, while restrictive, does provide legal certainty, and prevents silly lawsuits from getting off the ground (Because you HAVE to fit one of the four above). Basically Australia has a policy of 'You have to declare what's in the game on the damned box, okay?' coupled with the various intrusions via the Australian Christian Lobby, who as far as I'm aware, believe that gaming is the work of the devil, and all practitioners should be executed by rusty nails on wood. No, I wish I was kidding.


Anyway, Australian notes aside, It's not quite an inverted scale, but it's pretty close - Basically, for whatever reason, the classification body in the US believes that sexual content (And when I refer to sexual content, I mean everything romantic feelings to hardcore smut) should be heavily restricted towards adults in the gaming space. (I don't deal with TV standards, so yes, I'm aware how silly that sounds if you look at say MTV).

In the same vein, PEGI does not see violence as being anywhere close to nearly as acceptable as their US counterparts. They don't have any problems classifying and restricting the likes of Call of Duty and their like straight up to 18+ off the bat, compared to the much more lenient ratings the US gives. (I think it's Teen?)

Japan is the least squeamish generally, but they're closer to Europe than the US when it comes to actual violence (CoDs are a 18+ ie CERO Z).

Australia's pretty much in the middle, (We're more permissive than the other countries barring the most permissive) but with legal requirements. It's not necessarily stricter, but like I said, as a country, we demand the games actually declare what's in the damn game on the box, and 90+% of cases, we'd probably let you sell it, but you have to declare to the public what's on the box BEFORE they buy, not after.

Setsuna:
Back to less administrative issues about gaming, my copy of Atelier Sophie arrived.

The thing was ordered WAY back before the fire happened (Sometime in June actually) and it was escrowed, so it was unaffected by recent events. The package was paid for back then too, before you ask.

There may be a series of unboxing photos. Maybe a video. The person in question is... rather insistent on that sort of thing.

This weekend will be a fun one, since I'll have to do some quick resurrection of the recording rig, a rapid borrowing of a PS4, and a few other things.

Yes, the world for me moves with a new Atelier game, only cause I'm really that good at them, and been so for over twenty years.

Edit: Here's the photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeslagter/sets/72157659392315564/

I'd write up an opinion piece on Atelier Sophie, but depends if anyone wants to hear it.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page