d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Wong Kim Ark
Prev123456Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 34,186
Joined: May 25 2007
Gold: 21.00
Warn: 10%
Jan 23 2025 08:22pm
I'm not Libertarian. I'm somewhere between a Classical Liberal and a Moderate Conservative. My voter card says "Non-Partisan" and has (depending on the State I live in) said either that or "Independent" for 24 years. When it comes to the subject of games? Classical Liberal. I have no issue with pron games, I have no issue with bloody violent murder games, I have no issue with demonic or satanic games, I have no real issue even with Woke games. Religious games can be fun, though they typically suck.

Reminder: They're just GAMES. If you want better games of a cleaner variety, invest in a studio to a point where they can afford the high quality developers that can build a game with incredible art and gameplay, that is uniquely fun, that spreads your Christian message, or whatever message you want spread.

No, my issue with games is when they don't give you any warning that they're trying to push something. Whether it's sex in general, drugs in general, violence in general, modern day politics in general, religion in general, whatever? To go and charge someone $60 for a game that's supposed to be about gameplay and immersion, only to have players realize they MUST be gay in the game, or that they MUST kill all the characters in the game that they actually like, or whatever is a serious downer on the entire industry.


Thank you, that makes sense. I tend to view classical liberalism and libertarianism as the same idea in principle.

They're not just games, they are media - like movies, books, whatever. Media, as we know all too well now, is a tool for planting ideas into people's minds. Those ideas can be good or they can be bad, and its incumbent on a nation to regulate media as such. Gay stuff in video games is subversive messaging that messages to kids that it's okay to be gay, when it's not. It's simply not okay. It's a selfish self-designation which validates their reprobate mind and marginalizes the immense harm that the lifestyle has on a community (disease being just one of those harms). Its similar to the idea that it's not okay to be a weak loser, something that Jordan Peterson has articulated very very well.

apologies for off topic discussion. It really does hinge on what people believe those words to mean, what does jurisdiction mean. This is the same idea that describes the left vs. right divide: "what is harm?" Everyone agrees that harming others should be illegal. The right and the left simply disagree over the question "what is harm?"

This post was edited by El1te on Jan 23 2025 08:26pm
Member
Posts: 50,703
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 4,861.00
Jan 23 2025 08:29pm
You missed that the minor controversy over Elden Ring was that to appease DEI woke mind virus folks they changed it from Male/Female to Body Type A / Body Type B and that became its own meme
Member
Posts: 34,186
Joined: May 25 2007
Gold: 21.00
Warn: 10%
Jan 23 2025 08:30pm
You missed that the minor controversy over Elden Ring was that to appease DEI woke mind virus folks they changed it from Male/Female to Body Type A / Body Type B and that became its own meme


That's certainly woke. Elden Ring down
Member
Posts: 21,485
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 843.40
Jan 23 2025 08:37pm
Thank you, that makes sense. I tend to view classical liberalism and libertarianism as the same idea in principle.

They're not just games, they are media - like movies, books, whatever. Media, as we know all too well now, is a tool for planting ideas into people's minds. Those ideas can be good or they can be bad, and its incumbent on a nation to regulate media as such. Gay stuff in video games is subversive messaging that messages to kids that it's okay to be gay, when it's not. It's simply not okay. It's a selfish self-designation which validates their reprobate mind and marginalizes the immense harm that the lifestyle has on a community (disease being just one of those harms). Its similar to the idea that it's not okay to be a weak loser, something that Jordan Peterson has articulated very very well.


Large difference, but happy to help. I will note that according to nearly all "Partisanship tests" of the last 20 years, my views on foreign invaders and my views on law and order vs police brutality and my complete derision for intersectionality and all other forms of critical theory lands me square in the CONSERVATIVE!!!! basket. So a lot of what I say comes off as "conservative", but I'm not really concerned. It's easy to get my views. Just ask. :D

I understand your concerns regarding media and culture. On the flipside, as I said earlier in the topic, the majority of games are not targeted at children, they're targeted at the 18-34 age range. And I do NOT believe ANY legislation should EVER DICTATE how parents raise their kids. NEVER take the agency away from parents. If parents are going to immerse their children into gay bullshit? That's on THEM. As a parent, it is YOUR responsibility to determine what games, movies, series, books, etc. are suitable for your children. Nobody else's. So trying to "kick the gay" from games intended for adults in the first place? Is you attempting to control other adults.

It IS just a game. Just like GTA 3 was JUST A GAME. ZERO data exists showing that the GTA games led to people going out and stealing cars, killing cops, and causing the national guard to be deployed. ZERO data exists showing that games have turned men or women gay. And ZERO data exists showing that "clean" games have influenced people to clean up their act, or that Christian games have converted ANYONE. Nope. No data, friend. I would understand more about the issue with movies/TV, but even there, when talking about children? It's YOUR child. What they watch is determined by YOU. Why are you crying that things you'll never allow your kids to watch until they're old enough that you no longer have a say exist? When I'm looking for a new game to play, what's gonna have some kind of impact on your child doesn't enter my thoughts. I'm trying to buy a game. You worry about your OWN child.
Member
Posts: 34,186
Joined: May 25 2007
Gold: 21.00
Warn: 10%
Jan 23 2025 08:47pm
Large difference, but happy to help. I will note that according to nearly all "Partisanship tests" of the last 20 years, my views on foreign invaders and my views on law and order vs police brutality and my complete derision for intersectionality and all other forms of critical theory lands me square in the CONSERVATIVE!!!! basket. So a lot of what I say comes off as "conservative", but I'm not really concerned. It's easy to get my views. Just ask. :D

I understand your concerns regarding media and culture. On the flipside, as I said earlier in the topic, the majority of games are not targeted at children, they're targeted at the 18-34 age range. And I do NOT believe ANY legislation should EVER DICTATE how parents raise their kids. NEVER take the agency away from parents. If parents are going to immerse their children into gay bullshit? That's on THEM. As a parent, it is YOUR responsibility to determine what games, movies, series, books, etc. are suitable for your children. Nobody else's. So trying to "kick the gay" from games intended for adults in the first place? Is you attempting to control other adults.

It IS just a game. Just like GTA 3 was JUST A GAME. ZERO data exists showing that the GTA games led to people going out and stealing cars, killing cops, and causing the national guard to be deployed. ZERO data exists showing that games have turned men or women gay. And ZERO data exists showing that "clean" games have influenced people to clean up their act, or that Christian games have converted ANYONE. Nope. No data, friend. I would understand more about the issue with movies/TV, but even there, when talking about children? It's YOUR child. What they watch is determined by YOU. Why are you crying that things you'll never allow your kids to watch until they're old enough that you no longer have a say exist? When I'm looking for a new game to play, what's gonna have some kind of impact on your child doesn't enter my thoughts. I'm trying to buy a game. You worry about your OWN child.


I recognize that individual free thinkers have their own beliefs that don't fit neatly into a category, if people do fit neatly that's strong evidence they're just a social follower and not a free thinker. The liberal conservative definitions don't really hold up anymore, neither does right or left or the 2d political compass, because there are things that are simply not measurable.

I personally think that the government of a nation should absolutely regulate how parents raise their kids, to a certain degree. My opinion is validated by recent events over the last 10 years. If you allow parents to fully immerse their kids into the gay race communism cult, with no opposing force, eventually what happens is those kids become ascendant and control the government. And then they imprison YOU for not thinking how they want you to think. It's completely comparable to the arms race dilemma/prisoner's dilemma. Sure, if both parties back off, both parties benefit. But if one party keeps building their arms, and the other doesn't, the armed party simply conquers the unarmed party. This is exactly what almost happened. They relentlessly persecuted us and we had to fight tool and nail to stop it. I was never interested in politics until I was targeted by institutions I trusted, because I'm a white male.

This post was edited by El1te on Jan 23 2025 08:49pm
Member
Posts: 21,485
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 843.40
Jan 23 2025 09:00pm
I recognize that individual free thinkers have their own beliefs that don't fit neatly into a category, if people do fit neatly that's strong evidence they're just a social follower and not a free thinker. The liberal conservative definitions don't really hold up anymore, neither does right or left or the 2d political compass, because there are things that are simply not measurable.

I personally think that the government of a nation should absolutely regulate how parents raise their kids, to a certain degree. My opinion is validated by recent events over the last 10 years. If you allow parents to fully immerse their kids into the gay race communism cult, with no opposing force, eventually what happens is those kids become ascendant and control the government. And then they imprison YOU for not thinking how they want you to think. It's completely comparable to the arms race dilemma/prisoner's dilemma. Sure, if both parties back off, both parties benefit. But if one party keeps building their arms, and the other doesn't, the armed party simply conquers the unarmed party. This is exactly what almost happened. They relentlessly persecuted us and we had to fight tool and nail to stop it. I was never interested in politics until I was targeted by institutions I trusted, because I'm a white male.


The problem with what you're saying is that in many, MANY cases, like the overwhelming majority of cases, it's not the parents immersing their children. It's the schools.

I'm 100% behind pulling all critical theory out of schools. Be it conceptual or practice. Discontinue teaching "Social Studies" which focuses on social engineering, and get back to Civics. Get ALL sex-oriented "free-time" books out of schools period.

While we're at it, reintroduce shop, home economics (the real course set that teaches everything from home finances and repairs to cooking, cleaning, and maintaining a yard), and all the other by-gone practical application and/or skill-building courses. To K-12. Like, YESTERDAY. But that's not a Federal issue. The education systems are STATE education systems. You want that kind of change, you MUST work at the State level. OR, pull your kids out of public schools. Take your pick.

All kinds of things that could be done to stop the rot, and nearly all of them have little and less to do with parents. Sure, there are some freaky fucking parents that indoctrinate their kids into cults. They're the minority. When teachers are forcing students to pledge allegience to the LGBT flag to start their day, you're barking up the wrong tree complaining about video games. No lie.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Jan 23 2025 09:02pm
Member
Posts: 34,186
Joined: May 25 2007
Gold: 21.00
Warn: 10%
Jan 23 2025 09:29pm
The problem with what you're saying is that in many, MANY cases, it's not the parents immersing their children. It's the schools.

I'm 100% behind pulling all critical theory out of schools. Be it conceptual or practice. Discontinue teaching "Social Studies" which focuses on social engineering, and get back to Civics. Get ALL sex-oriented "free-time" books out of schools period.

While we're at it, reintroduce shop, home economics (the real course set that teaches everything from home finances and repairs to cooking, cleaning, and maintaining a yard), and all the other by-gone practical application and/or skill-building courses. To K-12. Like, YESTERDAY. But that's not a Federal issue. The education systems are STATE education systems. You want that kind of change, you MUST work at the State level. OR, pull your kids out of public schools. Take your pick.

All kinds of things that could be done to stop the rot, and nearly all of them have little and less to do with parents. Sure, there are some freaky fucking parents that indoctrinate their kids into cults. They're the minority. When teachers are forcing students to pledge allegience to the LGBT flag to start their day, you're barking up the wrong tree complaining about video games. No lie.


You make a great point and taking all the garbage out of schools should be the 1st step then continue to assess how it works, no further regulation should hopefully be needed. If its out of schools & other institutions, it falls to individual radical parents congregating on Reddit or elsewhere, which if de-clawed in government should cease to be an expanding threat.

Shop and home ec class were my favorite classes in middle school. It should be expanded and introduce just yeah basic real world practical skills. At the end of the day it didn't help to be forcing kids to learn advanced math when they struggled and wasn't their vocation. States would have to do their own thing but could be solved democratically over time with free movement between states. Dunno what could be done at the federal level to expand private schooling.

Gay stuff in video games though is low hanging fruit and should probably be gone at least as a policy of big game developers, it would have a negligible impact on creativity and game development and design. Perhaps some kind of incentive.
Member
Posts: 21,485
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 843.40
Jan 23 2025 10:37pm
Gay stuff in video games though is low hanging fruit and should probably be gone at least as a policy of big game developers, it would have a negligible impact on creativity and game development and design. Perhaps some kind of incentive.


What if the player is a woman, or at least playing a woman, and wants their RPG character to have a relationship with another woman, is that okay? If so, then the option for man to man relationships are also required.

Again, I'm completely in agreement that content advisements should be provided regarding what you're going to see in the game. To some, any sex or even hint of sex should not be in video games. To others, no religion. Etc. I believe people should play the games they WANT to play, not what they're told to play. The inverse is true, I believe people should NOT have garbage bullshit pushed on them that they do NOT want to play.

It's not even low hanging fruit at this point. Because the subject isn't really bad things being in some games. The real issue is that you get a game expecting one thing, and instead something completely different is pushed upon you.

One example on "woke changes" that I HATE. Going back to the fallout series: In fallout 1 and 2, among other... Interesting choices, you could become a child killer. Like, it's post nuclear war. Laws aren't a thing. You can kill entire towns. Or save them. Do whatever you want, right? Well, if you wander about killing children, pretty soon you have everything from bounty hunters and militias to the Brotherhood of Steel coming after you for being a rat bastard. But hey! Maybe you want to kill them all anyway, maybe the role you're playing is "Chaotic Evil". Good for you! It's just a game, right? Well, Fallout 3 and beyond (Bethesda), they removed even the option to kill children. "Killing children is NEVER acceptable!" No, it's a world without laws. EVERYTHING is up in the air. Why are you removing my choices? You've just damaged the immersion. So Bethesda's response? There are all of like 7 children in all of Fallout 4. Not killable, but basically, rather than having hundreds, or thousands of children like in Fallout 1 and 2, there's 7. In the entire Commonwealth. Wut?
Member
Posts: 45,717
Joined: Aug 25 2008
Gold: 40,130.00
Jan 24 2025 01:59am
Fallout 1 (1997) and Fallout 2 (1998) both had "gayness" as an option. As did Fallout 4. The primary difference is the "gayness" was never required in the Fallout series. You aren't REQUIRED to seduce the same sex.

But to answer your question: NO. Homosexuality has been part of video games for 30 years. And most other SJW or "woke" topics have as well, as well as the politics of that current day. The difference is, when pulling up lists of 90's and 2000's games you MUST try out, all the trash has already been filtered out. Like, there were umpteen thousand games released in the 90's. You play more than a dozen of them? Same with the 00's. How many of those? Today, you have thousands of games being released per month, all the way from simpler idlers and arcade style games to massive studio games. So it's really just a "drowning in shit" scenario. Unless you want to wait for the curated list of "Best games of the 2020's" to come out sometime around 2032, better to find game reviewers who enjoy similar games to you and wait for their recommendation.


I am playing POE 2 now. I did POE 1 as well, but it got too complicated after 3 years so I quit.
But poe 2 seems ok.
Member
Posts: 21,485
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 843.40
Jan 24 2025 04:51am
I am playing POE 2 now. I did POE 1 as well, but it got too complicated after 3 years so I quit.
But poe 2 seems ok.


Not really my thing. ARPGs just aren't so fun, at this point. FPRPGs are much better.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev123456Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll