Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

General: Dragon Age Sex Controversy Examined

11617182022

Comments

  • kysarykysary porto alegre/RSPosts: 7Member

    I found the Maximum, very innovative this system of relationships in the game, depending on the skill you I can move.

  • Justarius1Justarius1 Phoenix, AZPosts: 381Member

    To all the people talking about the US Government, let me give you a brief lesson in your own country's political system:

    We are a government by the people, for the people.  We're a representative democracy, a republic, which means that while the people do not control power directly, we do elect officials to, in essence, speak for us.

    What makes US government radically different from the British monarchy that came before it was that ANYBODY could become a representative - in the beginning, white land owners.  But now?  Anyone can run for office.  Anyone can become a representative.  That people have a hate and fear of a government made up of our cousins, brothers, sisters, parents, and loved ones just absolutely amazes me.  Politicians are simply people who wanted to go into the job of representing the people - some for pure reasons, some for impure and selfish reasons.  Just like with any job.  There are doctors who get into medicine because they want to help people, and there are doctors that get into medicine because they like the idea of having power over others and a huge paycheck.  Our elected officials are no different.

    "Government" telling you what to do is, in reality, we the people voting for people to represent us.  If you think you could do a better job of representing the masses, by all means - run for office.  Many people get involved in politics at a local level, at the state or even city level representatives.  You don't have to be "born of noble blood" in the United States to run for office; we have no House of Lords or anything resembling a noble lineage.  (Yes, despite the occasional politically powerful family.)

    "Government" isn't a separate entity in the US - "Government" is every man and woman in this country working to serve the populace of the United States through seeing that the wishes of their people are met.  The fact that this is a very large country with many different opinions doesn't change that; Government jobs aren't reserved for kings, queens, or a noble class - anyone can literally become any government official they want in this country provided they have the experience for it and the backing of their voters.

    This "government" involvement in what is appropriate in a game is simply an argument in our society over what some people feel is appropriate trying to impose their views (through their elected officials) on other people who do not share those views - same as pro-choice people trying to impose their views on pro-life people; same as pro tax-cut people trying to impose their views on pro-tax increase & spend people... etc.

    Sex-positive people are irritated that Victorian prudes are trying to limit art.  That is what this boils down to.  Games are indeed an art form; a form of storytelling, and the prudish among society have been trying to cover up genitals with a fig leaf since before we can remember.  (Didn't Ashcroft do just that in the Justice Department, taking a work of art statue and draping cloth over it because of his own fear and hatred of anything sexual?)

    The battle carries on but the more progressive and enlightened will always win out in the end; change and growth are the nature of things.

    image

  • gemillergemiller Pine Grove, PAPosts: 17Member

    IMHO, there should be no restrictions on games content like this, BUT, the sales of such games need to be much stricter mandated. No more 13 year olds going into the game store and walking out with games that should carry an R rating.

    A consenting adult should be able to play a game that apeals to them whether or not the topics in it are adult or not.

  • PunisherXPunisherX Milan, INPosts: 231Member

    I don't think it's the ratings fault. I don't think any 13-year old can walk into a game store and buy this game because I'm pretty sure it has a Mature rating. I would agree that any game like this shouldn't have anything less than a Mature rating, but any kid's getting their hands on this particular game, it's not the game rater's fault and it's not the game developer's fault. It's the parent who either didn't look at the rating or didn't care what rating it had.

  • MavadoKenyenMavadoKenyen Lawrenceville, GAPosts: 104Member

     I vote more gay sex in games! ^_^

  • PunisherXPunisherX Milan, INPosts: 231Member
    Originally posted by MavadoKenyen


     I vote more gay sex in games! ^_^

     

    lawl. ^_^ well, i can't say thats what im into, but i will say that i vote for more sex in games, period.

  • bcrankshawbcrankshaw JohannesburgPosts: 547Member

    I know my view on this article is a little outdated but I have no issue with the choice for whatever reason for someone to chose to have gay sex in DA. If I was homosexual in RL then I should be able to pursue that in the game as an option if the game offers sexual choices .For many people they consider gay sex as an aberration but to be honest I see this as hypocritical as they are fine with mass killings ,magic ,assassinations of innocents ,unadulterated heterosexual sex and every other deviance except “gay sex “

    I find it very refreshing and admire EA/Bioware for including this in the game as this is clearly a controversial decision for some :)

     

    "after the time of dice came the day of mice "

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,762Member Uncommon

    Well obviously I am ignorant and hateful as I don’t have your point of view.

    I was not being entirely serious, sorry about that as this is such an important issue and we all have to be sooo serious about it don’t we?

    I was not making the argument that any crime today is fine because it will be seen as alright tomorrow. I was parodying the process that leads games to be more of a sexual stew as time goes on. But humour, when it has to be explained, seems so boring.

    Using your argument, any act by consenting adults is fine, so I guess that includes a lovers suicide pact? Hopefully you can see that life is not so easy to boil down into such simple axioms as that.

    I also do love the ridiculous stereotypes being perpetuated by the made up words that sprinkle this thread. Sex-positive people and Victorian prudes….oh come on how value weighted is that? Making up words and expressions which give the concepts the moral spin you want is quite ridiculous.

    Do Sex-positive people want to see more tentacle sex, do Victorian Prudes want to remain chaste? Such nonsense just leads to a polarisation of views and a us and them mentality.

  • Oshrat22Oshrat22 JerusalemPosts: 1Member

    Even Persona is rated Mature, and it doesn't have any scenes of sex or something O.o

    People take it too seriously just because the game has a gay-relationship...

    It's a great game overall, and you didn't write anything about the gameplay >.>

  • gemillergemiller Pine Grove, PAPosts: 17Member
    Originally posted by Scot



    Using your argument, any act by consenting adults is fine, so I guess that includes a lovers suicide pact? Hopefully you can see that life is not so easy to boil down into such simple axioms as that.


     

    I'm beginning to think that a lot of mmorpg.com is pathetic, I see so many comparisons of video games to real life, which is exactly the reason this kind of argument even happens. A game is just that, A GAME.

    And to answer your question, as much as I'd think the two involved in the pact are a bunch of freaking morons, it's their life, their decisions and is not harming anything not involved, so let the morons go for it. It's not yours or mine own job to police the rest of the world from themselves.

  • GrumpyMel2GrumpyMel2 Catskills, NYPosts: 1,832Member
    Originally posted by Stratford

    Originally posted by Quicksand

    Originally posted by Oyjord


    I have nothing against the game, I'm an adult, I'm not challenged by pixels.
     
    However the writer(s?) on website which called it "dirty gay sex" should be condemned as a bigot and a homophobe.  He/she didn't criticize the game for its "dirty straight sex," did they?
     
    Sigh.  To think we're living in thee 21st c.



     

    So because someone does not agree with you, they should be condemned?? ohh wait, forgot thats how liberals think, be tolerant of everyone that agrees with you and condemn the rest as being intolerant...

    Sigh. To think we're living in the 21st c.

     

    Your moral relativism is flawed.  It's not ok to turn a tolerant check to bigotry and hate and say "Oh, it's just THEM having THEIR ideas."  Sure, tolerance is a key to a civil society, but for issues of hate, prejudice and bigotry, action must be taken. 

     

    We in America condemned racism in the 1950s and fought hard to pass the civil rights act.  Should we have just not fought and said "Oh, stop being so intolerant of our (racist) prejudice which keep blacks from being equals in America."

     

    Women, too, were institutionally discriminated against in America, until we fought hard in the early 20th c. to get women the vote.  Should we have just said "Oh, quite being so intolerant of our views, women should stay home barefoot and pregnant!"

    Germany was taking over Europe in the late 1930s.  Should we have just said, "Oh, let him go about his business.  Just bc YOU don't believe in the Final Solution doesn't mean we shouldn't let people do what they want."

     

    Bigotry, hate, racism and sexual discrimination need to be called out when we see it.  But Quicksand, go ahead, accuse me of intolerance all you want. *sigh*

     

    Big difference in the examples you are talking about peoples basic rights were being transgressed against. They were being denied representation in government, physicaly harmed even murdered.

    All the author did was describe gay sex as being "dirty".  That is merely voicing an opinion/belief. Last time I checked expressing your opinions/beliefs was considered a constitutionaly protected right, even when they are "offensive".

    You have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.... you don't have a right to freedom from "offense".

    So go ahead and "condemn" him verbally if you want.... you certainly have the right to express that OPINION.... just like he has a right to express his opinion. However that's where both of your rights END. He doesn't have a right to impose his values on you ... and you don't have a right to impose yours on him.

     

    P.S. Discrimination is actually a fairly natural part of the human condition. It's an inherited survival mechanism from way back in our history. We ALL have it to some degree in some form or another.... even those who decry it the loudest.  Basicaly one monkey see's another monkey eat a red berry with yellow leaves and fall over dead. That monkey is going to assume from there on out that ALL red berries with yellow leaves are poisonous and to be avoided. That may be far from the truth, as there may be many non-poisonous varities of red berries with yellow leaves. However, for a monkey that has no ability to tell one variety from another.... it's a pretty decent survival mechanism to treat all such berries the same. At it's heart, that's where discrimination stems from....making generalizations based on superficial outward qualities and anecdotal experiences. That's not saying it's a good thing or that it shouldn't be argued against..... just that we should understand the basis for it.  Our instincts will cause us to FEEL a certain way based upon such preconceptions. The key is not to let our emtional reactions dictate our actions.

    For example, if you were constantly bullied as a small child by some-one who always wore a blue shirt..... you WILL (likely) develop a negative emotional reaction to people wearing blue shirts when you are an adult. You'll FEEL that, regardless of whether you like it or not...and those feelings will be real. What matters is what you DO with those feelings. When you are walking down the street and see some-one wearing a blue shirt do you shrug and say "yeah blue shirts really skeeve me out... but he's probably an ok guy anyways"..... or do you walk over and punch the guy in the face.

  • GrumpyMel2GrumpyMel2 Catskills, NYPosts: 1,832Member
    Originally posted by Justarius1


    To all the people talking about the US Government, let me give you a brief lesson in your own country's political system:
    We are a government by the people, for the people.  We're a representative democracy, a republic, which means that while the people do not control power directly, we do elect officials to, in essence, speak for us.
    What makes US government radically different from the British monarchy that came before it was that ANYBODY could become a representative - in the beginning, white land owners.  But now?  Anyone can run for office.  Anyone can become a representative.  That people have a hate and fear of a government made up of our cousins, brothers, sisters, parents, and loved ones just absolutely amazes me.  Politicians are simply people who wanted to go into the job of representing the people - some for pure reasons, some for impure and selfish reasons.  Just like with any job.  There are doctors who get into medicine because they want to help people, and there are doctors that get into medicine because they like the idea of having power over others and a huge paycheck.  Our elected officials are no different.
    "Government" telling you what to do is, in reality, we the people voting for people to represent us.  If you think you could do a better job of representing the masses, by all means - run for office.  Many people get involved in politics at a local level, at the state or even city level representatives.  You don't have to be "born of noble blood" in the United States to run for office; we have no House of Lords or anything resembling a noble lineage.  (Yes, despite the occasional politically powerful family.)
    "Government" isn't a separate entity in the US - "Government" is every man and woman in this country working to serve the populace of the United States through seeing that the wishes of their people are met.  The fact that this is a very large country with many different opinions doesn't change that; Government jobs aren't reserved for kings, queens, or a noble class - anyone can literally become any government official they want in this country provided they have the experience for it and the backing of their voters.
    This "government" involvement in what is appropriate in a game is simply an argument in our society over what some people feel is appropriate trying to impose their views (through their elected officials) on other people who do not share those views - same as pro-choice people trying to impose their views on pro-life people; same as pro tax-cut people trying to impose their views on pro-tax increase & spend people... etc.
    Sex-positive people are irritated that Victorian prudes are trying to limit art.  That is what this boils down to.  Games are indeed an art form; a form of storytelling, and the prudish among society have been trying to cover up genitals with a fig leaf since before we can remember.  (Didn't Ashcroft do just that in the Justice Department, taking a work of art statue and draping cloth over it because of his own fear and hatred of anything sexual?)
    The battle carries on but the more progressive and enlightened will always win out in the end; change and growth are the nature of things.

    Nice post, but in reality the Founding Fathers were just as concerned about a "tyranny of the majority" as they were a "tyranny of the monarch".  That's why we aren't a simple democracy (like many of the Greek City States were) but a Constitutional Republic. The rights of individuals are recognized by our Constitution (note I said "recognized" not established....as the Founders believed that such rights were inherent and inalienable... granted from God or nature.... not from society or government) and the limits of Governments power to impose upon them were established. It's also why a simple act of Congress (by majority vote and signed by the President) can NOT supercede any of the limitations established by the Constitution. The Founders recognized the fact that the Constitution might need to be amended from time to time....but the mechanism they provided for such was purposefully NOT simple or easy...and required far more then just a majority to enact.

    Futhermore, the Framers recognized the basic axiom that power corrupts... even in a representative government. Let's remember that England, at the time of the Revolution, WAS a limited Monarchy. It was the Kings Ministers (who many of the colonists viewed as corrupt) that evoked the anger of the populace as much or more then the King himself. That's why we have different branch's of government....with competeing sets of powers....designed to act as check upon the powers of the other branches of government.

    Our system is pretty good (which is why it has been relatively stable)....however it's still far from perfect....and frankly Government as an institution has VASTLY increased it's power from that which it held in the beggining and continualy eroded those limitations on the power over individual citizens.

    Note that the proper relationship between the individual and society (as represented by government) has been one of the most important topics of political discourse in western society for centuries. Finding the proper balance between the competeing interests of each...is pretty much the heart of political discourse. The fact that we have a representative government doesn't actually change that....just helps determines who represents the interests of society.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • KalmarthKalmarth Lake Havasu City, AZPosts: 443Member

     

     

    Tell the writers to read the rating before they start there liberal rants about games, then remove anyone who bought the game for there underage kid with out reading the rating, out of the gene pool and were all good to go.

    Ratings are there for a reason, they spend a lot of money getting and giving out ratings to ignore them as a journalist or a parent shows how ignorante they are to the world of gaming, as journalists they SHOULD know better but in this case obviously not, as parents you should at least give the pretense that you are raising your child and watching what they are doing, hell you wouldn't let them buy a porno (I hope) but you will let them buy an M rated game....

    /rant off

  • PyscoJuggaloPyscoJuggalo Chicago, ILPosts: 1,114Member
    Originally posted by GrumpyMel2 
    For example, if you were constantly bullied as a small child by some-one who always wore a blue shirt..... you WILL (likely) develop a negative emotional reaction to people wearing blue shirts when you are an adult. You'll FEEL that, regardless of whether you like it or not...and those feelings will be real. What matters is what you DO with those feelings. When you are walking down the street and see some-one wearing a blue shirt do you shrug and say "yeah blue shirts really skeeve me out... but he's probably an ok guy anyways"..... or do you walk over and punch the guy in the face.

     

    As someone who has a formal education in psychology your example is piss poor.

     

    Anyways, what we are talking about here with this form of discrimination is SOCIAL CONDITIONING, not CLASSICAL CONDITIONING which is related to behaviorism and not social psychology.  Social conditioning is when your culture conditions you to believe gays are icky, evil, or "dirty."  Since it is apart of social conditioning and not CC, then society (other people) need to set norms to change this social conditioning (changed to, "being gay is just part of human variation").  So the guy you are complaining about has the correct response, creating new norms that make those people, who believe gays are icky, social deviants outside the norm.

     

    You have the incorrect response, but I am sure it is only because you are ignorant of social psychology.

     

    ---Oh and I bought this game without even knowing the controversy, glad I bought it as I support the elimination of censorship in video games.

    image
    --When you resubscribe to SWG, an 18 yearold Stripper finds Jesus, gives up stripping, and moves with a rolex reverend to Hawaii.
    --In MMORPG's l007 is the opiate of the masses.
    --The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence!
    --CCP could cut off an Eve player's fun bits, and that player would say that it was good CCP did that.

  • Justarius1Justarius1 Phoenix, AZPosts: 381Member
    Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

    Originally posted by Justarius1


    To all the people talking about the US Government, let me give you a brief lesson in your own country's political system:
    We are a government by the people, for the people.  We're a representative democracy, a republic, which means that while the people do not control power directly, we do elect officials to, in essence, speak for us.
    What makes US government radically different from the British monarchy that came before it was that ANYBODY could become a representative - in the beginning, white land owners.  But now?  Anyone can run for office.  Anyone can become a representative.  That people have a hate and fear of a government made up of our cousins, brothers, sisters, parents, and loved ones just absolutely amazes me.  Politicians are simply people who wanted to go into the job of representing the people - some for pure reasons, some for impure and selfish reasons.  Just like with any job.  There are doctors who get into medicine because they want to help people, and there are doctors that get into medicine because they like the idea of having power over others and a huge paycheck.  Our elected officials are no different.
    "Government" telling you what to do is, in reality, we the people voting for people to represent us.  If you think you could do a better job of representing the masses, by all means - run for office.  Many people get involved in politics at a local level, at the state or even city level representatives.  You don't have to be "born of noble blood" in the United States to run for office; we have no House of Lords or anything resembling a noble lineage.  (Yes, despite the occasional politically powerful family.)
    "Government" isn't a separate entity in the US - "Government" is every man and woman in this country working to serve the populace of the United States through seeing that the wishes of their people are met.  The fact that this is a very large country with many different opinions doesn't change that; Government jobs aren't reserved for kings, queens, or a noble class - anyone can literally become any government official they want in this country provided they have the experience for it and the backing of their voters.
    This "government" involvement in what is appropriate in a game is simply an argument in our society over what some people feel is appropriate trying to impose their views (through their elected officials) on other people who do not share those views - same as pro-choice people trying to impose their views on pro-life people; same as pro tax-cut people trying to impose their views on pro-tax increase & spend people... etc.
    Sex-positive people are irritated that Victorian prudes are trying to limit art.  That is what this boils down to.  Games are indeed an art form; a form of storytelling, and the prudish among society have been trying to cover up genitals with a fig leaf since before we can remember.  (Didn't Ashcroft do just that in the Justice Department, taking a work of art statue and draping cloth over it because of his own fear and hatred of anything sexual?)
    The battle carries on but the more progressive and enlightened will always win out in the end; change and growth are the nature of things.

    Nice post, but in reality the Founding Fathers were just as concerned about a "tyranny of the majority" as they were a "tyranny of the monarch".  That's why we aren't a simple democracy (like many of the Greek City States were) but a Constitutional Republic. The rights of individuals are recognized by our Constitution (note I said "recognized" not established....as the Founders believed that such rights were inherent and inalienable... granted from God or nature.... not from society or government) and the limits of Governments power to impose upon them were established. It's also why a simple act of Congress (by majority vote and signed by the President) can NOT supercede any of the limitations established by the Constitution. The Founders recognized the fact that the Constitution might need to be amended from time to time....but the mechanism they provided for such was purposefully NOT simple or easy...and required far more then just a majority to enact.

    Futhermore, the Framers recognized the basic axiom that power corrupts... even in a representative government. Let's remember that England, at the time of the Revolution, WAS a limited Monarchy. It was the Kings Ministers (who many of the colonists viewed as corrupt) that evoked the anger of the populace as much or more then the King himself. That's why we have different branch's of government....with competeing sets of powers....designed to act as check upon the powers of the other branches of government.

    Our system is pretty good (which is why it has been relatively stable)....however it's still far from perfect....and frankly Government as an institution has VASTLY increased it's power from that which it held in the beggining and continualy eroded those limitations on the power over individual citizens.

    Note that the proper relationship between the individual and society (as represented by government) has been one of the most important topics of political discourse in western society for centuries. Finding the proper balance between the competeing interests of each...is pretty much the heart of political discourse. The fact that we have a representative government doesn't actually change that....just helps determines who represents the interests of society.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Not sure where you disagree with anything I said; but kudos for being so well spoken.

     

    image

  • LodenDSGLodenDSG Crawfordville, FLPosts: 266Member
    Originally posted by Moretrinkets


    what controversy?



     

    What secret?

    I know the romance options to inlcude the sex but its no secret last I checked it was on the label and I know I heard/saw teasing of the romance options in the game well before release and its not nude well not without a mod, some good nude mods now natural bodies fix it right up . . . back to the point it was no secret, not hiden, not new and not the only opportunity for sex in the game or other games, movies, books and music. Liek any other form of media if you dont like the content then dont consume it if you do then pay for it dont pirate it and enjoy.

    I for one dont think the game needs the M rating, yes there is plenty of blood and the killing the kid is defently a 17+ thing but M? perhaps I'm not think clearly but M seems like it should be reserved for more brutal games when I can kill my target then skull Fu*& it that gets an M rating when romance options include BDSM with fully detailed penitration that gets an M rating or woce yet rap that is a bit harsh perhaps for the 17 and over market but a little off colored hummor and a few chase romantic love clips is by no means M even the bit where you kill the possesed boy isn't graphicly done granted the idea of killing a child is a bit harsh but its not half as graphic or grimy as R moves or even Showtime after 9pm.

    Not sure why game catches so much hell with this, kids are requiered to read books that have some very matur content in them, they are rightfuly thought of as clasics, when a move it does it, its a bit less accepted but still accepted for 17 or older but if a game 2 adult character dry humping with their undies on its a no go. My only comment to the dev is that I am disapointed they didn't have full nudity, I dont expect penatration I dont need porn in games I have the net thank you but it is a bit imersion breaking to see a bra on a midevel-esk avatar much less while she is in bed even far less when she is in bed getting laid grow some balls then draw them on my male avatar earn that M rating ESRB tagged you with.

    image

  • CracMonkiCracMonki Lafayette, LAPosts: 22Member

    grin...

     

    I just wanted to state that pornography is nothing more then the writings about prostitutes..

    And that everything else falls under the deffinition of erotica.

    The word Pornography wasn't introduced into an english dictionary until 1857 and at that time the word ment what it ment originaly "the writting material about prostitution or prositutes"

    The word originates as a greek word Pornographos and that is what it means.. Writing about prustitutes or prostitution...

    The convertion of Pornography from being information on prostitutes to being sexual acts deplected for pleasure didn't come about untill 1975.

    I would also like to point out that, While sexualy explitic materials have been arround for many years... It wasn't untill the end of the 1700's and the beginning of the 1800's that "Pornographic" (as we know of it now adays) material began to be soely produced for the reason of sexual arousel and didn't truely come to the masses untill the mid 1800's before this time, most pornigraphic matireals was writing as a way to provoke a responce from political powers. It was used for shock value to bring to the front the wrongs of the Ruling Power.

    Also... We owe all of what we find to be Pornographic to a man named Marquis de Sade he was the true inventor of what we call pornography to day, he wrote about every deviant sexual act that could be exicuted with the human body...

    Also.. another thing i want to point out... Homosexuality was an excepted and openily practiced form of human sexuality. This wasn't really forced out of socity untill later in history. And that even in the early pornographic (useing the term as we know it today well close to as we know it today), before the mid 1800's women were not deplicted as villions but as heroins, and where given more control over there destinies and there freedom of sexualities then in any time after.

    And to close with... i would love to do a little bashing of my own... Constantine I

     

  • probably has been several times but seriously thats why theres ratings on games and if the parents are letting there kids play video games which have a mature rating. then please go call childrens services on em or something but get of biowares back. they made an epic game.

  • programmercsprogrammercs Houson, TXPosts: 1Member

    It appears that for WorldNewsDaily, the most pressing issue in the "World" is a digital enactment of gay sex.  Um.. Yea, let me see, but it appears to me that WorldNewsDaily has employeed a staff of complete idiots.  A video game is more pressing that looming terrorist attacks, a terrible economy, and sky-rocketing unemployment, (And that is just in the United States)?   I don't think so.

    I do know something, I have never heard of WorldNewsDaily before I read this post.  And judging from the quality of what their priorities are, they will continue to remain in obscurity.

  • boytekboytek West Hollywood, CAPosts: 3Member

     here is a email i sent to the writer of that so called article 



    "First of all I would like to point out a few lines from your very own article, It has a "Mature" rating. That line is self explanatory.

    In one video clip posted online, a player selects the role-playing option, "I want to discuss something personal." Ok are you speaking from your experience of playing the game or someone else's experience? If not your own then you truly can not comment on anything about the game. If the player selects the response, "I suspect we are," the elf agrees to have homosexual sex with the character. There you yourself said IF THE PLAYER SELECTS. If someone is a homophobe as i suspect you are then why would you select it? I honestly do not understand all the homophobia. The mature rating is there for a reason and people like you should not even bother with mature game ratings because you apparently can not handle anything maturely. Now if the game did not give you a choice and conformation about the choice then i can see why someone would have a problem with it. Why would you ask a male character if you are playing a male character to go the tent with you?

    And then you comment on other things which you should not because you have not played the game your self and if you had you would not make the assumptions you have already In another YouTube clip of a role-playing scene, a young boy possessed by a demon declares, "You'll never win! You'll never take him! He's mine!"

    The child is slain, and a female demon with horns and a tail emerges from his corpse. there is a choice where you can sacrifice the mother to save the child or you can go to the mages tower and get the mages to help so no one dies.

    And again i will quote you It has a "Mature" rating."

  • ThillianThillian BratislavaPosts: 3,143Member Uncommon

    Post the reply then please, altho I doubt there'll be any. Probably not even read.

    REALITY CHECK

  • AshanorAshanor Brevard County, FLPosts: 97Member

    You know what I am sick of? Retailers and people of this world acting as if video games are just for children. I am a 29 year old male and I have been playing video games my entire life. I enjoy doing it in my free time. I prefer to play video games as a hobby rather than go play golf or something. How come it's fine for Wal-Mart to sell rated R movies but a rated M video game always causes some big controversy? I got news for you media, the big spenders on video games these days are in the 25-29 age group, and there is no reason you should be crying over a video games that were rated appropriately. It's as stupid as if you were against Wal-Mart selling rated R movies, or any other retailer for that matter. Grow the hell up.

     On another note, why is it in American culture (if you can call it that) that it is alright for a movie to spill blood and guts everywhere, mutilations, murders, rape, torture, you name it.... but sex is something unnatural that should be left out of movies? What the hell? Sex is unnatural but we can watch movies where people are tortured and murdered in cold blood, and with gory realism I might add. Let me repeat that one more time, murder is natural but sex isn't. What is wrong with you people?

  • danyp1danyp1 Richmond, VAPosts: 1Member

    Bravo Bioware

    Shame on the "moral majority"

    Maybe they are not the majority any longer

    Nuff said

     

    Danny

  • eburneburn Winchester, VAPosts: 740Member

    PC game of the Year.

    Screw you 700 Club.

    I kill other players because they're smarter than AI, sometimes.

  • grandpagamergrandpagamer Perrydice, IAPosts: 2,221Member
    Originally posted by Ashanor


    You know what I am sick of? Retailers and people of this world acting as if video games are just for children. I am a 29 year old male and I have been playing video games my entire life. I enjoy doing it in my free time. I prefer to play video games as a hobby rather than go play golf or something. How come it's fine for Wal-Mart to sell rated R movies but a rated M video game always causes some big controversy? I got news for you media, the big spenders on video games these days are in the 25-29 age group, and there is no reason you should be crying over a video games that were rated appropriately. It's as stupid as if you were against Wal-Mart selling rated R movies, or any other retailer for that matter. Grow the hell up.
     On another note, why is it in American culture (if you can call it that) that it is alright for a movie to spill blood and guts everywhere, mutilations, murders, rape, torture, you name it.... but sex is something unnatural that should be left out of movies? What the hell? Sex is unnatural but we can watch movies where people are tortured and murdered in cold blood, and with gory realism I might add. Let me repeat that one more time, murder is natural but sex isn't. What is wrong with you people?

    Gay sex is unnatural but in a fantasy game it has its place along with elves, dwarves and gnomes.

Sign In or Register to comment.