A couple of articles sparked political outrage over at Game Politics recently. I found it amusing that in each one a group of primarily liberal posters then a group of primarily conservative posters were upset that the "other group" was attacking their first amendment rights.
So which is it, are first amendment game publishing and consumer rights a liberal issue or a conservative issue?
In any case, on this 4th of July I hope that anyone reading this blog will do what they can to stand up for their rights and for American liberty, even if you don't live in the U.S. If it wasn't for the example the founding fathers of the United States set, then a lot more of the world would look like Iran or North Korea right now. People can argue about Honduran democracy because the United States set an example in making democracies. People in Iran can call out for their rights because the U.S. set an example in saying we have rights not because of the government but that the government has them because of the people. That our rights are G-d given by our creator and not because people in power are amused to give them to us. Fireworks can be fun sometimes, but enjoy the liberty you have to look at fireworks, read the news, and read my blog without government censorship that exists in many countries.
So there have been a lot of attacks in the Mainstream U.S. Media lately about the "filth" in video games and how we need to crack down on it. Very dangerous stuff that continues to erode our 1st amendment rights.
Articles about people being arrested for pornographic drawings disturb me, especially as the prosecutors and proponents of it look at it as a case for cracking down on video games and other forms of media. So let me start with the unfortunately necessary disclaimer. I am not a proponent of rape simulators, excessive violence, or for that matter even pornography. In fact I would personally advocate against pornography and gratuitous graphic violence of any sort. At the same time I recognize that violence and even deviant sexuality have to be protected forms of free speech. To quote what is attributed to Voltaire:
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
The why is simply that I don't wish to see a repeat of history. Don't tell me while they're arguing about public burqa wearing in France that our pornography laws can't go that extreme.
There have already been a bunch of excellent arguments against this censorship. Game Politics and Neil Gaiman in particular are two excellent defenders of Video Game free speech. So I'll try to keep it short and simple:
Banning rape in free speech is as likely to ban "The Crow" as "Rapelay", more so in fact as Rapelay is a Japanese game not an American one.
The extreme majority of males (let alone female) is likely to be sickened or outraged by content in games like Rapelay than turned on. I trust the general U.S. public on this one, and I expect it wouldn't be socially acceptable.
If there was a market for it, then the game would likely be marketed in the U.S. ... the company which produced has not seen a market for the game in the U.S. nor can anyone find examples of games that are.
It is hard to argue that sexual violence is worse than the dismemberment and other gory horrific violence which is more prevalent in our speech n the U.S.
It does not prevent violent or sexual crimes. Japan has prevalent pornographic and violent media, yet the rates of violent crime are far, far, far less than places like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc where the censorship of these materials are covered under the countries death penalties.
The prevalence of pornography in modern culture has not coincidentally coinsided with the decline of legalized prostiitution and red light districts.
Drawings and cartoons do not suffer, there is no 'victim' in a drawing, cartoon, or simulation game. Save the outrage for where it matters.
Fictional depicitions of sex are preferable to actual pornography trade where Adultery and Fornication are rampant parts of the industry from my standpoint.
If you are a religious person like myself, doesn't it make sense that replacing prostitution with pornography is an improvement? and likewise isn't replacing porn actors with illustrations an improvement?
I'm also against "thought crime" of any sort. There is no picture it should be illegal to download over the internet. NOTHING. People should be free to get disgusted by filth and depravity on the internet. Not to encourage it, but to discourage it.
The ones you go after are the uploaders, and they're protected because anyone who downloads "illegal content" is afraid to report it for fear of being a criminal. Turn the whole world into deputized cops where you're it is okay to download evidence of crimes (whether terrorist chat rooms, illegal pornographers, etc) and anybody can report you to authorities who will stop you.
You shouldn't need to pay for a certification to wear a white hat and be a good guy. Expect it of all our people and enable everyone to be a force for goodness. Because as we're seeing in Iran simply hoping that those empowered by the government are not too corrupt is a bad gamble.
I play Vor 1st edition and am greatly, greatly looking forward to playing the 2.0 rules.
I play Shadowrun 3rd edition, but won't touch 4th edition.
I enjoy playing the new World of Darkness setting Changeling but you could hardly convince me to play any of their older games. You couldn't hardly convince to play one of their other current games unless I could play a changeling in it.
What is it about some editions where we have preferences as gamers? What should companies be learning? Should companies always push for a new edition every few years to boost sales? Should they sometimes admit a new edition is a bad idea when older editions sold better?
The Shadowrun universe fansite has Dumpshock has banned discussions on comparing 3rd and 4th edition. Is it really because people frequently argue there or because they enjoy close relations with the developers of 4th edition? Seems like the site should be honest and just call themselves a website for Shadowrun 4th edition only but I believe they want to be a perpetual crusade to convert players of older editions. They administrators have had a subtle agenda to downplay 3rd edition and push 4th edition. The change in editions here has been followed with a sea change of faces. The old developers and the old publishing companies are long gone. Many of them were more pushed out, while others just moved on from a setting that was leaving them behind. People who play 4th edition, mostly never played 3rd edition. I can find 3rd edition play groups in every town I play in because the game is very popular and had a large following. 4th edition does not have the coverage in game stores that 3rd edition did and you don't find it in as many places. 3rd edition at release was a top selling game that outsold D&D at the time. 4th edition is an almost obscure RPG that has a profitable following, but not a big one. The few groups I've seen playing it in game stores are largely unfamiliar with any previous edition of the game. Frankly when the changes are as drastic as they are in 4th edition from previous Shadowrun editions the game shouldn't even have the same name. It isn't a game of cyberpunk and high fantasy any more, 4th edition Shadowrun is about high-tech and Guns & Sorcery. It is like comparing a William Gibson novel and a Star Trek novel because they both deal with a future. In both cases it is about the setting, the feelings it evokes, the essence of "flavor" that is being dealt with in the stories. They're night and day despite the futurism. The current producers of Shadowrun 4th edition won't go back to 3rd edition, it isn't what they started with and they have the license to do what they want and they're making a living off of it.
I wonder though, does Topps feel the same way or are they looking at the what the customers want and how much MORE PROFITABLE 3rd edition was? Ever since the demise of Wizkids, Topps has never announced their intentions for Shadowrun and Battletech and I suspect, hope even that they've got bigger plans to make the franchises more popular like they once were.
White Wolf killed off the entire storyline when they changed editions. Which is in my opinion a better way of "rebooting" the entire setting than what was done to Shadowrun. I was the opposite of a fan of the old setting, and most of the new setting as well so I won't comment a lot. Some of their edition changes have been a huge success (i.e. New Changeling versus Old Changeling) and some a huge flop (New Werewolf versus Old Werewolf). I would say their edition changes were successful, but they still have a bit to learn about what exactly makes a game good.
VOR the Maelstrom. In the planning stages for a 2nd edition after being out of print for what is going on 8 years now. It is hard to make too many stereotypes about the community as it has seen a lot of face changes in the last year. Currently there are a number of discussions about changes in the 1.0 forums and requests for additions to 1.0 content till 2.0 comes out. Why would you talk about or ask for editions to a dead game that is out of print and never coming back? FASA is out of the game business forever. What is the point of asking for tiny bits of that? If people love VOR then they need to support 2.0 and not try to tear the game apart or make it become a completely different game. The setting and game rules are not going to be "rebooted" like World of Darkness or Shadowrun were and that has been explicitly stated on more than one occasion. If you really like VOR why would you want it to be?VOR will be a good edition change like Shadowrun 1st to 2nd to 3rd was. Fix holes in the game mechanics, add some new content, and advance the story. Editions should not be about making an entirely different game. That is the point of the word Edition: A new iteration of what already exists.
Sigh, I think I've had my fill from the U.S. media this last week. Get ready for a religion & gaming rant in this blog (or stop reading now).
Does it seem like the only thing that won't get mocked by the U.S. news when it comes to religion is Atheism and Islam? Even though combined they still make up less than 10% of the total U.S. population. Earlier this week I read and watched lots of news about how every Christian and all of the Right Wing media is incitement towards domestic terrorism. Yet just before and also the same day we saw terrorist/hate crime acts by Muslims played down in the mainstream media. Thank goodness for the internet and bloggers who will present things that the Cable news networks and Newspapers won't.
I think what was really over the top was the media response to President Obama's speech this week. I'm not going to talk about the speech or the merits of it, you're all welcome to your own political persuasions. But in the U.S. I saw the media stooping to a level deference for Islam that would knock me over flat if they did the same for Christianity, Judaism or even Buddhism. Here is the media emoticon version:
Muslim World = 8D Christian Nation = ~:( Jewist State = >:-[
Now I'll be open and honest, I've got respect for a lot of religions but the "Religion of Peace" has yet to win my good neighbor "wouldn't it be nice to have more of those nice folks living next to you" award. While I appreciate the cultures and people of Europe and the Middle East, the months of my life spent in those parts of the world have made me very, very, very grateful to be living in a country with Freedom of Religion protections for as long as it can be made to last.
So what does any of this have to do with gaming? Enter Electronic Arts, already known for draconian measures against paying customers to take control of their computers and make sure you're not doing anything they don't approve of because you've played one of their games. Known for paying bottom dollar in the game industry to its employees, being the first to layoff, hostile corporate takeovers, and having the most MMO games close servers after release. Well here is another one:
EA is now inventing fake religious controversies over their games to try and get media attention.
Easily believed to be another wacky group of Christians right? Well a lot of people believed so, but this is actually an EA publicity stunt. If this had been done as a joke, I might have taken it as one but AP news actually had to do some research to determine it was a fake. I find this as funny as a fake Suicide bomber, fake Self-immolating monk, or an Anti-Semitic joke.
It has already been my policy to not buy EA games because you have no idea what their software is going to do to your computer since they have demonstrated time after time having 0 respect for their customers. But after this kind of gross public misconduct I'm ready to start my own Electronic Arts boycott that extends to Wii games and every platform. I'm not into boycott petitions, but just hurting them where it counts... their bottom line.
Now on to another E3 note: I guess the good side of the fake Electronics Arts protest is that the E3 security recognized their constitutional right to assemble on a public sidewalk and FAKE protest. Unfortunately they didn't do it out of principle as they tried to have these booth babe protesters removed from the public sidewalk. This also happened to be another fake protest, fake protesting the $3,000 fine for having booth babes wearing bikinis inside the Adults Only E3... in Los Angeles.
Soooooo, yeah. Skip E3, if you have any sense go to PAX which so far has never failed to have more common sense and more respect for your 1st Amendment Rights.
Getting a good number of company contacts but few interviews and no job offers so far. Hopefully something gives soon, and likely it will be a game company as they are the main companies hiring right now that I'm applying for.
I've kind of quit beta testing the MMO I've been playing. Not because the game is bad, but because some combat changes made it not fun to really test my main character and totally invalidated and made pointless my main alt. It is both good and bad for the game when it releases, but I just don't have the heart to put the work in to try and make the changes work in their current form.
But I did think I'd talk about why I quit prior MMOs I've played:
Anarchy Online - quit this game due to a dying roleplay community, being harassed by one of their volunteers, and the tediousness of trying to advance my main character at all.
Neocron - Develops decided to punish all their customers because a few exploited things they didn't like. Some of the exploiters were aided and abetted by GMs (wittingly or unwittingly) and it just made PvP not any fun to be beaten by exploits repeatedly.
Saga of Ryzom - Despite a lot of warnings they went ahead with patches that destroyed a lot of people's characters and made the game unplayable. They didn't roll back the disaster either and I was among the people leaving in droves.
World of Warcraft - Left because of drama with the immature community, being stuck raiding for character advancement, then having that raid gear completely redesigned at Blizzard's whim after working hard for it.
Horizons - Bad company took over and killed it for me. The community died and there isn't enough storyline or interesting things to do for me to jump back into their second Tier character advancement. Plus frankly, it is hard going back to those graphics, glitches and sound effects after playing LotRO.
Lord of the Rings Online - Mines of Moria killed it for me by completely screwing up their combat mechanics, redefining the role my chosen class played and making the endgame content both easy and pointless. Don't get me started on how they drove me away from their version of PvP.
I think the main lesson to learn is don't screw up why your customers are there. Don't do the Neocron, always be nice to your customers. Have something challenging and meaningful for when your characters have maxed out casual character advancement. Don't massively overhaul game content once you've launched it if people are still using it, it can be very upsetting. Don't sell your company the moment it starts to make a profit, and don't buy it from someone if the game has just changed around unless you're willing to put A LOT into it.
When you're a developer thinking about how game changes will impact the customer, use the Golden Rule.
Don't let your ego get in the way of doing what is Smart.
