Live action films? I think I may be sick.
As to physical child abuse, rather than sexual - harvesting little sisters in BioShock? Fallout straight up lets you acquire a title reward for killing children, if you so wish to roleplay. Here’s the icon they made (but didn’t use) for the sequel.
In SWAT 4 there was a level where you rescue (not perpetrate) a teenage victim of sexual abuse from a sex dungeon. I don’t remember if you have to ziptie her hands like you have to for civilians in other levels. I guess you could shoot or tase her if you tried… but that would make you a monster.
~Max
I suppose wanton physical abuse in games isn’t limited to those who have reached majority, yeah. So Bioshock would be one example of the non-dilemma. When it’s stylized and abstracted like that, I would imagine any kind of game mechanic could represent any kind of real world evil. Who’s to say what you’re really doing when you Connect 4.
In Fallout 1 and 2, there weren’t any quests that revolved around killing children that I can recall. But if you got into a fight in a populated area, it was always possible your grenade would miss the target and land on a group of children. But you could always throw a grenade at one on purpose I suppose.
Harvesting the Little Sisters in Bioshock was rather intense. They cry and struggle against you as you jab a needle into them and take their essence.
One of the more infamous missions in GTA5 requires you to torture someone, including pulling their teeth, shocking them with electricity, and other nasty tools. If I’m not mistaken, they eventually altered the game to allow you to skip this mission, but not when it first came out.
Yes, exactly. They refer to “In this game a player may direct her character to run over innocent pedestrians.” Except that, in the world of GTA, no one is innocent. Everyone is some degree of corrupt, criminal, violent, you name it. Every “innocent” NPC is primed to commit violence at a moment’s notice.
I suppose in some sort of moral vacuum there is an equivalency between virtual killing and virtual sexual assault. In both the practical and human sense there is not.
Simulated combat is a well accepted training exercise and ‘game’. Children play cops and robbers and such.
Simulated sexual assault is not. I can’t think of any good reason for it to exist in a video game beyond current accepted limits of it in media (where it is mostly taboo to show directly on screen).
Yeah, I thought about that but since it was already mentioned in the thread didn’t spend any time on it. (Seemingly) unpopular opinion but Trevor was a garbage character who was not interesting or compelling, just dully abhorrent, and made playing the game significantly less fun each time he was involved on screen. I didn’t bother finishing the story though so maybe he has a moment later – wouldn’t be worth getting to, though.
What’s the dilemma? Morally, there isn’t a difference between virtual murder and virtual pedophilia. I’ve never heard anyone claim otherwise, and presumed nobody would. I am actually surprised to hear that it takes a studied philosopher to point out the obvious, and even more surprised to hear it presented as a “dilemma”.
While they are morally equivalent, virtual murdering and car stealing is just a lot more fun to a much larger audience than virtual baby raping. One sells, the other doesn’t. I don’t think it has anything to do with morals.
I don’t think that follows. There’s tons of very niche video games and, yeah, you’re unlikely to see Ubisoft’s RapeSim existing but that doesn’t mean we wouldn’t have a ton of indie games with it as a theme. There’s already a bunch of cheapie Unity-engine sex games out there so it’s not much of a step to removing consent or age barriers. More an issue of distribution and finding your audience.
Thinking about it, one place where I have seen this is in Visual Novel games. I remember when there was a ton of low-tier game bundle sites out there and you’d see “Hentai VN Bundle!” with titles like “Blackmailing My Bitch Sister” and “My Mindcontrolled Mom’s Seduction” which were exactly what they sound like. These got a bemused “wtf?” out of most of us but there was obviously a market for it. No idea if any openly involved children but “She’s 18, honest” for a 12 year old looking schoolgirl is a common enough trope in the hentai world that I wouldn’t doubt it.
I’m not entirely sure I’d call it “morals” but if I catch my son playing Rape-a-Little-Girl 2 on his Xbox, I would absolutely flip the fuck out. I’m not entirely sure what would happen, but there would be all sorts of shit happening, and none of it would be “let me see how much fun it is to virtually rape a 6 year old girl”.
I’ll play the games with the guns and the pickaxes and ripping people’s spines out, shooting droids and stormtroopers, or blowing monsters to kingdom come, but rape is right out. And not because it isn’t as much fun, because it’s vile.
Is ripping people’s spines out not vile, though? While you’re not sure if its due to “morals” or something else that make it off-putting (less enjoyable, therefore less fun), the argument discussed in the OP is specifically the argument of comparative morality. If we’re going to talk about other reasons why one game is worse than the other, then we are having a different conversation and not responding to the “Gamer’s Dilemma”. That dilemma is an argument concerning morality, not general vileness. I am surprised that this is even considered a dilemma at all, because I thought the fact that both are morally equivalent was a given. Can’t imagine someone logically arguing otherwise.
In a video game? Nope. It takes on a cartoonish aspect, we don’t get bothered when Daffy Duck gets shot in the face, or blows himself up on stage.
Here we are.
Video game violence is cartoonish fun, video game rape is gross and disturbing. I have serious questions about the morality of people who think video game raping a little girl (or anyone really) is hilarious.
I think because we are primed to accept “collateral damage” (civilian deaths) as part of a warfare scenario. Most of the games we are talking about seem to create a warfare-like scenario in one way or another, and the deaths are justified by presenting the characters as enemies blocking the path to victory. We all seem to agree that in the scenes where this isn’t true the deaths feel different, even when they are only pixels.
Whereas the point of rape is personal enjoyment, and it is never necessary in any way. There can be no justification - or even mitigation - so our conscience reacts more strongly. All of this doubles again with the addition of children to the scenario. It is just a very pure evil.
I would go so far as to say that if being forced to watch isn’t torture for you, then there is something inherently wrong with your moral character.
Ripping out Kano’s spine doesn’t compare to handling raw chicken, let alone what I imagine killing a human with my bare hands would feel like.
Right, which goes back to my original statement:
There are a (blessedly) very few among us who would get a rush from that.
A game with a 2 Girls 1 Cup or Goatse Mission wouldn’t be hilarious or enjoyable, and I couldn’t imagine how playing or watching that wouldn’t be torture to someone. I wouldn’t presume said person to necessarily be of poor morals, though. Simply poor taste.
Isn’t that literally everyone who played the game and enjoyed it? If playing the game didn’t stimulate your brain to release pleasurable chemicals, you’d have experienced the game as boring.
I guess we are defining “rush” differently. I think we probably agree that you are not describing an orgasm-level response?
Right. But we were talking about the addition of children to the scenario. If you saw a child with a goatse-level stretching, I’m sure you would call the FBI between gags and/or sobs.