next »

[ak]

its dangerous to ban things just because a certain group of people find it disgusting. Those people may not be right.

Moreover, we would end up banning pretty much everything

[jimmythechang]

Additionally, censorship is an awfully convenient way to divert attention from actual issues. It's easier to go after a book or a movie depicting rape than it is to collar every sexual offender.

[PlayMeTape]

If anything, a game like Edmund opens a discussion like this where more is learned about the subject. Bringing these things into the public in many different ways is a good way to raise awareness. I know a lot of people already know that rape is a terrible thing, but I don't see how more discussion about it can hurt.

This is one of the few reasons I like standup comedy. Generally this seems like one of the first mediums which aknowledges subjects that people tend to avoid. Even if it is just for jokes, that forces people to recognize the issue (as we do now). Those opposed will speak up (most commonly it starts in that end). This (hopefully) leads to healthy discussion. Which is better than ignoring it completely. Amirite:P?

[Anthony Flack]

Also, after reading this I can firmly state that I am pro censorship (although only in rare cases). I don't see why anyone would want to defend a game like that, and I don't know whether to laugh or cry when people compare a game like RapeLay to A Clockwork Orange just because they share a common element.

I think it becomes a different matter when it's a commercial product. It has to go through the ratings board, for starters. And they will consider such nebulous values as "artistic merit" when deciding whether something is fit for release or not.

But this isn't a commercial product; it's an experiment, being shared with other game developers. Which is a different matter, because we need to be able to experiment and share our ideas *before* we can hope to create something with "artistic merit".

[Alec]

But this isn't a commercial product; it's an experiment, being shared with other game developers. Which is a different matter, because we need to be able to experiment and share our ideas *before* we can hope to create something with "artistic merit".

Of course, an experiment can also have artistic merit whether its been "approved" by other developers, etc. Random accidents can have artistic merit too.

I was just randomly thinking about Edmund again and how wrong it felt to hit the female character. In most games you kill things on the screen and you don't really give a crap. I think the fact that it feels so wrong is pretty interesting - even though the gameplay mechanics of "hitting another character" have been thoroughly explored in other games.

I guess context in games is still really important after all. i.e. They can be about more than boxes intersecting at their core.

[fishmatt]

Who would've known that the best approach to the competition would be to set out to make a deliberately anti-fun game?

[Farmergnome]

Who would've known that the best approach to the competition would be to set out to make a deliberately anti-fun game?

Actually one thing that really stuck with me from Cactus's interview on front page awhile back is games don't have to be fun  I hope he wasn't joking 

About the game rewarding you for raping victims, thats true if you are looking at it from the game progression standpoint, to get the most of the game you have to act out the rapist.  The good endings leave the player feeling hollow.

If you were a rapist, and you resisted your urge to rape Emily you would have the same feeling, there wouldn't be closure, you would just feel hollow, knowing that you had bested the urge to rape someone, there is no cheering crowd or trophy stand, just the gut feeling that you did something right.

The bad endings have there own downsides though, but not directly related to game progression, you have to rape Emily, then shoot and rape her, sure you get all the gritty details, and some closure, at the expense of what though?

[Anthony Flack]

Of course, an experiment can also have artistic merit whether its been "approved" by other developers, etc. Random accidents can have artistic merit too.

Oh yeah, totally. What I meant to say was, we can't expect them to. We need to be able to freely exchange our work with one another, regardless of whether it has any artistic merit or not.

A commercial retail release is another matter; that's when you could potentially debate something's merit, and whether it should be allowed to be sold in your local shops.

[Alec]

Of course, an experiment can also have artistic merit whether its been "approved" by other developers, etc. Random accidents can have artistic merit too.

Oh yeah, totally. What I meant to say was, we can't expect them to. We need to be able to freely exchange our work with one another, regardless of whether it has any artistic merit or not.

A commercial retail release is another matter; that's when you could potentially debate something's merit, and whether it should be allowed to be sold in your local shops.

Gotcha.

Question: Why should games always have to be "fun"? Isn't it possible to imagine a game that uses both "fun" elements and "un-fun" elements to explore certain themes? (especially if there is a deliberate contrast between the two)

Can't experiencing "un-fun" elements be "fun" in the sense that you're learning something or experiencing something very unusual?

[FiaStarta]

this thread made me understand why the girl is given flowers (after being punched &) before being fucked in Super Cock Blockers

[Anthony Flack]

Perhaps "fun" is just a problematic word here. We don't, generally, talk about books and movies being "fun" - and if we do, we mean something quite specific; a kind of lighthearted playfulness.

I do often say that I'm trying to make games that are fun, and when I say that I mean it in the more specific sense. For the more general case, I guess you would say it was "rewarding", or something like that.

[fishmatt]

this thread made me understand why the girl is given flowers (after being punched &) before being fucked in Super Cock Blockers

I was jumped on extremely early in our thread about our concept being demeaning to women. The difference, however, was that I wasn't setting out to create something provocative; just something irreverent and cheesecakish, based around a solid gameplay concept. I had intended to do the "proposal" thing from the start because it's hilarious, but in retrospect it just looks like I was covering my ass.

Edmund is using the game format as a vehicle and nothing more; it's only barely different than a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book. The subtextual baggage it drags along with its subject matter, along with the visceral/repellant sound (juxtaposed with the cartoony graphics), combine to make the experience far more immersive than it really ought, even if the only point of the thing is to make you feel disgusted that you played it.

It's a fantastic art project; i'm just a little miffed because I spent a lot of time worrying about variety and balance that I could've spent designing a brief but shocking way to provoke controversial discussion. This is what you get when you live inside the box, I suppose.

[jimmythechang]

I do often say that I'm trying to make games that are fun, and when I say that I mean it in the more specific sense. For the more general case, I guess you would say it was "rewarding", or something like that.

"Rewarding" is a good way to put it.  "Fun" generally connotes you're having a laugh a minute, shooting things and dicking around and what have you. Games -do- have to be rewarding, either cerebrally or otherwise; it's difficult to justify spending time on any activity that isn't. Fun is optional.

[Lurk]

My position is very similar to Cactus. I have a question for you guys, how many of you are female, or had your girlfriends/wives try it? I had a talk about it with mine, I was really curious to know her opinion of it. We reached the conclusion that most males will not be able to understand the trauma of rape, because of the biological design of our genitalia(it's difficult to rape a male human unless you're another male human). The talk was really interesting, about male dominance and my own admission that, while I truly can empathize with the rape victims on a social fabric/human level, I can probably never share the horror that simple word will bring to a human female's mind. I still liked the story setting and mood, but I feel an interactive experience putting you in the rapist shoes is not really what the world needs right now.

[PlayMeTape]

My position is very similar to Cactus. I have a question for you guys, how many of you are female, or had your girlfriends/wives try it? I had a talk about it with mine, I was really curious to know her opinion of it. We reached the conclusion that most males will not be able to understand the trauma of rape, because of the biological design of our genitalia(it's difficult to rape a male human unless you're another male human). The talk was really interesting, about male dominance and my own admission that, while I truly can empathize with the rape victims on a social fabric/human level, I can probably never share the horror that simple word will bring to a human female's mind. I still liked the story setting and mood, but I feel an interactive experience putting you in the rapist shoes is not really what the world needs right now.

It's only different because we let it be different. That's my opinion atleaast. If history would have been paved with female dominance I think a lot of things would have been seen differently today, and you wouldn't say such a thing. Personally I don't think it's helping anyone declaring differences between genders (even though I obviously know there are some).

[John Nesky]

Personally I don't think it's helping anyone declaring differences between genders (even though I obviously know there are some).

If it's true that men are significantly less likely to understand the horror of heterosexual rape intuitively (I think this is probably true, and that it's one of the biggest differences between the sexes, way bigger than any apparent difference in, say, math), then I think it is very important to recognize and discuss the issue, since we can't rely on intuition to take care of the problem.

[PlayMeTape]

Yeah sure if you discuss the manner of which someone rapes another person there's a difference between heterosexuell rape for women and men. But I don't think this is because of any organs, men can be raped or sexually abused/assaulted in the same manner and I think it's an equally horrible experience to both genders.

[Lurk]

Christoffer: So how come no homosexual rape game into the contest? I'm wondering how it would have been perceived, same game, replace the women by men. That would be an interesting experiment.

[PlayMeTape]

Christoffer: So how come no homosexual rape game into the contest? I'm wondering how it would have been perceived, same game, replace the women by men. That would be an interesting experiment.

Are you saying you wouldn't react to it? I'm sorry but it had to be said. You did the same thing to me.

[John Nesky]

men can be raped or sexually abused/assaulted in the same manner

Are you referring to rape from another man? If so, I think that is a different thing. It is true that heterosexual men can have an intuitive understanding that being raped by another man is horrible. However, most such heterosexual men would never be willing to have sex with a man, whereas women are perceived as more mysterious. Sometimes they want to have sex with a man and sometimes they don't. It is unclear to most heterosexual men what exactly women are feeling when they have sex with a man, and what it is that makes non-consensual sex so much worse than consensual sex. I think heterosexual men are more likely to compare rape to their own heterosexual experiences, where it is difficult to imagine being horribly raped by a woman.