Current Events > What's the argument against being able to harm video game children?

(+) Yeah! (+)

because of cucks
---

CyricZ posted...

Take Musou/Warriors games. Thousands of soldiers die in every single battle in one of those games, yet no one really addresses it and it's all the hero characters speaking to each other as though they're the only people involved in the fight and all the soldiers are just blades of grass they're cutting down. Which they are, if you follow what the game wants to imply in its tone.

I know people who refer to the genre as lawn mowing simulators so.... yeah

I personally think I'd rather think about the opposite of this question too: why can we just kill random adults in games with no consequences?
---

So what i got from all the responses is that there is no reason except "because that's how it is".

It's really weird where we draw lines that society cannot cross. You can make the most disgusting gore vomit inducing game out there and it's cool for people, but tapping a video game kid on the shoulder is "crossing the line".
---

That's not weird, that's how the social contract of society works. It's strange you can't understand that
---

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

So what i got from all the responses is that there is no reason except "because that's how it is".

That's... not quite what everyone said. As several of us have implied, it's more complicated than that. It always is.

I offered some perspectives I'd hope we could take a little deeper if you wish.
---

nikko004 posted...

It's probably a legal thing

What law? Pretty sure it's just awful publicity

I always download mods that let you kill those little fucks when I can
---

Impacting the game's tone significantly.

It's morally wrong. Kids see video games as part of the practical world, unable to understand that video games operate in an isolated area not meant to be taken as fiction. When a video game teaches them to shoot living targets the child thinks that is how the world operates. The Florida shooter played violent video games 12-15 hours a day and then decided to get real guns and shoot up an area filled with real people, all because the video game tried to declare what is. If we have video games where the player can be violent to depictions of kids then we'll see a sharp increase in behavioral problems in children and the media will likely try to frame it in a way that upsets a selected group of people.

HorrorJudasGoat posted...

It's morally wrong. Kids see video games as part of the practical world, unable to understand that video games operate in an isolated area not meant to be taken as fiction. When a video game teaches them to shoot living targets the child thinks that is how the world operates. The Florida shooter played violent video games 12-15 hours a day and then decided to get real guns and shoot up an area filled with real people, all because the video game tried to declare what is. If we have video games where the player can be violent to depictions of kids then we'll see a sharp increase in behavioral problems in children and the media will likely try to frame it in a way that upsets a selected group of people.

Shut the fuck up

I've played thousands of hours of online shooters and never thought about shooting anyone up irl
---

Ivynn posted...

Also this. I remember reading somewhere that being able to kill children in Fallout 2 prevented it from being sold in Europe.

really? I'd like to read up on that
---

There isn't one. It's just data, data that has no sapient or sentient capabilities. It cannot feel, it cannot think, it cannot act on its own, no matter how much a human dev tries.
---

Ivynn posted...

Also this. I remember reading somewhere that being able to kill children in Fallout 2 prevented it from being sold in Europe.

really? I'd like to read up on that
---

@WesternMedia posted...

Ivynn posted...

Also this. I remember reading somewhere that being able to kill children in Fallout 2 prevented it from being sold in Europe.

really? I'd like to read up on that

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_Trilogy

It still sold in Europe, IIRC they just took all the child characters out.
---

Juhanor posted...

@WesternMedia posted...

Ivynn posted...

Also this. I remember reading somewhere that being able to kill children in Fallout 2 prevented it from being sold in Europe.

really? I'd like to read up on that

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_Trilogy

It still sold in Europe, IIRC they just took all the child characters out.

But is that a law or just to avoid bad publicity?

In the 90's you could kill kids in PC games. Then the morality police cracked down on it. I think it's mainly cause they don't want killing kids on consoles and most of the big PC games also get ported to console these days

Juhanor posted...

@WesternMedia posted...

Ivynn posted...

Also this. I remember reading somewhere that being able to kill children in Fallout 2 prevented it from being sold in Europe.

really? I'd like to read up on that

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_Trilogy

It still sold in Europe, IIRC they just took all the child characters out.

But is that a law or just to avoid bad publicity?

Dash_Harber posted...

gunplagirl posted...

JE19426 posted...

HydroCannabinol posted...

In REAL LIFE you can be in a warzone and murder people without being in trouble

No you can't. Murdering people is always illegal.

Not always, there's obviously the fact that there needs to be a country involved in the process of carrying out said crime that has he capacity to charge someone with the crime. No government in the war zone = not actually a crime. That said, if you're representing a nation like the US and go overseas to a warzone, you'd be representing the US and are therefore still under US jurisdiction.

But if you went somewhere as a civilian and never returned to the US? Then it becomes difficult to say it's a crime if there's no government or council or tribunal or anything to actually try and hold you accountable.

Ummm ... no. There is an international criminal court for a reason. Here, maybe this will clear things up a bit; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court

It's sort of the reason that war criminals actually get punished. Otherwise, they could easily just argue that their country was in no position to prosecute them and get away with anything.

Wow I never knew about that. Thanks for the new info

Dash_Harber posted...

gunplagirl posted...

JE19426 posted...

HydroCannabinol posted...

In REAL LIFE you can be in a warzone and murder people without being in trouble

No you can't. Murdering people is always illegal.

Not always, there's obviously the fact that there needs to be a country involved in the process of carrying out said crime that has he capacity to charge someone with the crime. No government in the war zone = not actually a crime. That said, if you're representing a nation like the US and go overseas to a warzone, you'd be representing the US and are therefore still under US jurisdiction.

But if you went somewhere as a civilian and never returned to the US? Then it becomes difficult to say it's a crime if there's no government or council or tribunal or anything to actually try and hold you accountable.

Ummm ... no. There is an international criminal court for a reason. Here, maybe this will clear things up a bit; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court

It's sort of the reason that war criminals actually get punished. Otherwise, they could easily just argue that their country was in no position to prosecute them and get away with anything.

Wow I never knew about that. Thanks for the new info!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyxUHnQD7qA" data-time="&start=623
---

EverDownward posted...

There isn't one. It's just data, data that has no sapient or sentient capabilities. It cannot feel, it cannot think, it cannot act on its own, no matter how much a human dev tries.

Everything is data. Every thing that is a thing, including us, is at its core a collection of data. Every interaction between two or more things is at its core an exchange of data. Our minds are data shaped by data. Our sentience is a natural result of a sophisticated system of taking in and storing data. We won't have to program sentience into AI, it will automatically be part of sophisticated AI.

On topic; censorship should never be enforced on creative outlets. If a crime is committed in the creation of something then that crime is already illegal. Illegally hacking aside, coding is not a crime. That being said certain things will have very little appeal, will be banned in nations that don't practice freedom of speech, and will cause trouble to video game developers from a PR perspective.

yo stop
---

yo stop.
---