Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
WHAT ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW?
Posts
Kylaila
View playlists
Closeauthor=nhubi
Yes unity, he did, and yes it does.
Also Ratty, if you really want to subject yourself to it, I have a copy drop me a line and I'll stick it in my locker.
Already passed it on.
I read a list libby made about some of the awful/stupid things in that game. I only got halfway through that list because the stuff listed was so bad. ugh.
author=Kylailaauthor=nhubiAlready passed it on.
Yes unity, he did, and yes it does.
Also Ratty, if you really want to subject yourself to it, I have a copy drop me a line and I'll stick it in my locker.
Thanks, dear, now I don't have to take up locker space.
Housekeeping
3571
Haven't played The Hawkman or anything, but the trailer ends with a satirical note (The Hawkman: The Game We All Want). I mean, even in that first quote Liberty used to say that it's serious: "Let me see your donger." I don't think anyone ever seriously used the word "donger."
I'm curious about this as well. The game seems bad in a Pink Flamingos kind of way.
author=nhubi
I'm curious, is it going to be taken off 'denied' if he removes the 'horny teenage' angle, or makes a very obvious disclaimer about content?
I'm curious about this as well. The game seems bad in a Pink Flamingos kind of way.
ubon
66
satire requires a certain kind of execution, not just a silly little 'hey it's all jokes, see?' at the end. it isn't a catch-all word for 'the creator intended this as a joke, so it's okay', regardless of whatever the zeitgeist of uncritical gamers would have you think.
the content itself is the subject of Liberty's decision, not the creator's intentions. I don't know how this kind of thing always gets sidetracked into pretending that none of that 'counts' as long as it was done with a waggle of the eyebrows, but here we are!
that said, this is a point of policy I'm wondering about too! I'm leaning toward 'shove it in the garbage zone', personally, but I'm always very all-or-nothing about this kind of thing.
the content itself is the subject of Liberty's decision, not the creator's intentions. I don't know how this kind of thing always gets sidetracked into pretending that none of that 'counts' as long as it was done with a waggle of the eyebrows, but here we are!
that said, this is a point of policy I'm wondering about too! I'm leaning toward 'shove it in the garbage zone', personally, but I'm always very all-or-nothing about this kind of thing.
Honestly, we have rules about what is and is not allowed. The fact that he straight-up told me there was only one rape scene and little sexual content in the game (when that's all it is) is only part of the issue. The rest of it is that what is in the game breaks rules, at the moment.
(Also, it was a group decision. Games like this, most of the time, are checked with the group just in case I'm being too touchy. I'm aware of my own biases and keep them out of the judgement of games as much as I can. It's best to get a consensus and that way we're all on the same page in case shit blows up.)
I mean, we had a game try to come through that was all about being a Jew and making Jew jokes and it was horribly anti-Semitic. It was represented as a joke game but that doesn't mean we excuse horrible talk by just laughing and going 'oh, it was a joke. hee hee'.
His game is denied until such time as it meets current site standards. This means:
- removal of extreme sexism (it's in the way he portrays both women and men - men are only seen as horndogs who want in women's pants. There's about 5 men (shop keepers and the king) who don't. All others are either fucking a woman, wanting to fuck a woman, planning to fuck a woman or wanting to fuck him. :/ And yeah, when your game has 5 of the 20+ women in it who have names while all others are called bitch/whore/etc, you have an issue)
- removal of hate speech (faggot is not a joke term guys. Oh, ha ha, look this faggot got dead after he tried to hook up with me ain't i fucking hilarious hahahaha. No.)
- removal of child abuse (seriously. not. on.)
- removal of rape depicted as 'she really wanted it really see she enjoyed it so she wanted it hahaha look i did a funny because she wanted the dick even though she said no/was asleep at the time see she said it was great hahaha'
Now, I know some of you are gonna go "BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS GAME SEE IT HAS SEX AND CHILD ABUSE AND BLAH BLAH STOMPING ON FREE SPEECH OMG BLAH". To that I say - it's how something is depicted that really changes whether it breaks the site rules or not. If you handle something touchy like rape or child abuse in a non-horrendous and serious way, we're not gonna have an issue.
But making the hero out as a hero because he rapes a woman in her sleep and then comments on how great it was before deciding to cover up the fact he did so by getting her drunk boyfriend in her bed or raping a kids mother in front of him, then telling him (after he asks about what happened) to go try it on that little girl you met earlier (who you mentioned when you talked to her was 'too young' for your tastes) is horrible and just so fucking bad. There are sites out there that will let you put that up but this is not one of them.
Sorry, but NOT SORRY.
(Also, it was a group decision. Games like this, most of the time, are checked with the group just in case I'm being too touchy. I'm aware of my own biases and keep them out of the judgement of games as much as I can. It's best to get a consensus and that way we're all on the same page in case shit blows up.)
I mean, we had a game try to come through that was all about being a Jew and making Jew jokes and it was horribly anti-Semitic. It was represented as a joke game but that doesn't mean we excuse horrible talk by just laughing and going 'oh, it was a joke. hee hee'.
His game is denied until such time as it meets current site standards. This means:
- removal of extreme sexism (it's in the way he portrays both women and men - men are only seen as horndogs who want in women's pants. There's about 5 men (shop keepers and the king) who don't. All others are either fucking a woman, wanting to fuck a woman, planning to fuck a woman or wanting to fuck him. :/ And yeah, when your game has 5 of the 20+ women in it who have names while all others are called bitch/whore/etc, you have an issue)
- removal of hate speech (faggot is not a joke term guys. Oh, ha ha, look this faggot got dead after he tried to hook up with me ain't i fucking hilarious hahahaha. No.)
- removal of child abuse (seriously. not. on.)
- removal of rape depicted as 'she really wanted it really see she enjoyed it so she wanted it hahaha look i did a funny because she wanted the dick even though she said no/was asleep at the time see she said it was great hahaha'
Now, I know some of you are gonna go "BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS GAME SEE IT HAS SEX AND CHILD ABUSE AND BLAH BLAH STOMPING ON FREE SPEECH OMG BLAH". To that I say - it's how something is depicted that really changes whether it breaks the site rules or not. If you handle something touchy like rape or child abuse in a non-horrendous and serious way, we're not gonna have an issue.
But making the hero out as a hero because he rapes a woman in her sleep and then comments on how great it was before deciding to cover up the fact he did so by getting her drunk boyfriend in her bed or raping a kids mother in front of him, then telling him (after he asks about what happened) to go try it on that little girl you met earlier (who you mentioned when you talked to her was 'too young' for your tastes) is horrible and just so fucking bad. There are sites out there that will let you put that up but this is not one of them.
ubon
66
also important at times like this to reaffirm that denying a game space on this private forum-slash-hosting-site is not equivalent to 'censoring' the game. it's allowed to exist, and it can continue to exist everywhere it pleases -- just not here. the people who run the site have exercised their right to choose what kind of content they willingly host, and that's both correct and necessary.
Yup, it's in the rules of the site when you sign up - under the Bad Content Ban, which allows us to exercise a right to remove anything we believe is, in a word, shit (we're flexible on what constitutes that term, though). Having a game page is a privilege, and yes it is one of the biggest draws of the site, but we still get to choose what we want on the site.
Besides, it's not the be-all, end-all if your game is denied. You just fix it and viola~ back on again. Of course, in this case, he'd have to re-write the whole story side of the game because good lord. That list? That was almost every NPC in the game - outside of the witch having more dialogue, some shadowy figure, the battle in the tower and the king's speech, that was the content of the game - and those things only came in the second half.
Besides, it's not the be-all, end-all if your game is denied. You just fix it and viola~ back on again. Of course, in this case, he'd have to re-write the whole story side of the game because good lord. That list? That was almost every NPC in the game - outside of the witch having more dialogue, some shadowy figure, the battle in the tower and the king's speech, that was the content of the game - and those things only came in the second half.
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
Given how shit that game was, I have to think that "... impale you with my vengeful spear!" was a double entendre.
Housekeeping
3571
@mawk: I never said it was good satire. If you want to block games based on deftness of execution, there would only be a handful of games on the site. And, it's not about saying "this is okay;" it's about saying, "this is okay enough to tolerate," which is a pretty easy club to get into.
Anyway, yeah, it's a private forum, so the administration's position is final. My argument for keeping this game would be that it seems pretty obvious that it's a Pink Flamingos kind of exploitation game; it looks like it's breaking taboos for the sake of breaking taboos, which is a right of expression. It's not really within my sensibilities and I doubt I'd ever play it, but tolerating things that exist outside of my sensibilities is something I deal with all the time, so I don't see much of a difference here. I'd rather see a controversial (while admittedly juvenile) game than one of the hundreds of generic RPGs that weigh down this site and RPG Maker's reputation with the sin of mediocrity, and "fixing" the game based on the listed criteria would change it from "notable but terrible" to "just terrible."
Again, I realize that RMN is a private forum, so it can allow or ban whatever it likes, but I just felt like airing my thoughts.
Anyway, yeah, it's a private forum, so the administration's position is final. My argument for keeping this game would be that it seems pretty obvious that it's a Pink Flamingos kind of exploitation game; it looks like it's breaking taboos for the sake of breaking taboos, which is a right of expression. It's not really within my sensibilities and I doubt I'd ever play it, but tolerating things that exist outside of my sensibilities is something I deal with all the time, so I don't see much of a difference here. I'd rather see a controversial (while admittedly juvenile) game than one of the hundreds of generic RPGs that weigh down this site and RPG Maker's reputation with the sin of mediocrity, and "fixing" the game based on the listed criteria would change it from "notable but terrible" to "just terrible."
Again, I realize that RMN is a private forum, so it can allow or ban whatever it likes, but I just felt like airing my thoughts.
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
author=Housekeeping
If you want to block games based on deftness of execution, there would only be a handful of games on the site. And, it's not about saying "this is okay;" it's about saying, "this is okay enough to tolerate," which is a pretty easy club to get into.
author=Housekeeping
My argument for keeping this game would be that it seems pretty obvious that it's a Pink Flamingos kind of exploitation game; it looks like it's breaking taboos for the sake of breaking taboos, which is a right of expression.
author=Housekeeping
I'd rather see a controversial (while admittedly juvenile) game than one of the hundreds of generic RPGs that weigh down this site and RPG Maker's reputation with the sin of mediocrity, and "fixing" the game based on the listed criteria would change it from "notable but terrible" to "just terrible."
Yeah, because "RAEP FAGGOT LOLOLOLOL RAEEEEEEEEEEEEP" promotes better PR than "Dragon Quest #23094920 + effort".
RPGMaker.net: Where else can you get raped this badly?
There's a new tagline for ya.
It seems more obvious to me that this is a shitgame made to be a piece of shit, shocking for nothing more than jeuvenile shock value, and the lowest kind of common denominator that elevates nothing more than bile at the back of my throat, let alone the art of games. Just taking a fat dump on taboos is pretty lame.
I would much rather have 100 more dragon quest clones.
I would much rather have 100 more dragon quest clones.
