Will you be importing The Witcher?

Originally Posted by Prime Junta
…
Similarly, it's quite possible that someone who's already seriously disturbed will be pushed over the edge by a really bad session of multiplayer Team Fortress 2. Does that mean we should ban Team Fortress 2?

I don't think so.

What we should do is try to do something about the seriously disturbed people once we recognize that they're seriously disturbed. Restricting everybody else's freedoms in order to stop the disturbed people from getting more disturbed is not the right solution.

What do you think?

I couldn't agree more. Restricting freedoms to provide some false pretense of safety or security is not a good thing. Personal responsibility and accountability are good things.

Originally Posted by dteowner
Yep, dead for me too. I'm guessing it's anatomically correct Johnny Holmes and Jenna Jameson skins for Sims2, demonstrating that even the most innocent game can be corrupted by naughty children badly in need of a little corporal punishment.

Sims is so good that playboy actually made a porn version of it called the: "the mansion". Playboy is infact pushing for games industry. They even have game related nude models or somthing.

@Jabber: From where I'm sitting, you're now engaging in the well-worn tactic of subtly changing your position. I objected to your claim that violent media were, in some cases, a direct and primary cause of criminally violent behavior, which I called horse-pucky on. There is no proof that this is true. Never has been. Your example of the fascination some deviants have with porn is a common, backwards-logic fallacy. You're trying to create a causal relationship from a circumstance. Worse, it creates a dangerous diversion that takes attention and energy away from the real challenge: recognizing and dealing effectively with people that become increasingly disconnected from their families and communities until they are in danger of crossing the line into sociopathic behavior, before they cross that line.

Now you're saying that we're all madly calling for a society that enforces no restrictions or regulations on itself. Don't be ridiculous. Of course there is an obligation to provide for the common good and safety. For instance, I see nothing wrong with game ratings. In fact, they are NOT censorship, but a good way for governments to help their people make better judgments about what is and is not appropriate for their children. But this was not your original point. You were not defending the rating system. You were saying that less violent media is better since it sometimes causes criminal violence. And that, I'm afraid, is completely unsubstantiated nonsense.

I'm sorry that you want to continue chamr, because I for one am done with this discussion. I have not backpedaled, nor do I intend to. I don't understand how you can say the idea that less violent media is better since it…. wait… what I think you meant to say regarding my stand, was that less violent media is better since it sometimes may curtail criminal violence. Yes, that's what I believe, and I don't understand how anyone can believe that is unsubstantiated nonsense? Numerous psychological experiments have proven the effects of outside influences on thought patterns and decision making. For instance there was an experiment on the influence of music on customers' decisions to purchase certain brands of wine. When a store played German music, customers (no doubt oblivious to the influence) purchased German wine, when French music played, they followed suit with French wine.

The type of proof you evidentally are looking for doesn't exist, because we can't read peoples' minds! Sure there is no way to know all of the ins and outs of a killer's brain and what makes him tick, but if it has been documented and observed that certain influences cause certain reactions (e.g. the wine experiment), what part about this is so hard for you to believe?

As far as the ratings system goes, I think it's total bunk. I gaurantee it doesn't make any difference whatsoever to 99.9% of adult gamers, and barely makes a difference to "discerning parents." And that goes back to the whole 'parents as mentors' idea. While there are diligent parents fulfilling their roles well, like dte no doubt, I have also seen plenty of children in R rated movies, and plenty of children renting R rated videos, and buying M rated games with their parents. Heck, we buy 'em toy guns when they're barely old enough to walk and teach 'em how to shoot the 'bad guys'! Sure it's the parents responsibility, and their right to decide what's best for their children, but considering what i believe to be compelling evidence that these things can can influence children negatively, I think that it puts society at greater risk than if these things were simply not available. Do I want to play the Witcher? Sure! Do I think the world would be a safer place without it and 500,000 other violent games out there? YES.

See what you made me do? And I was so ready to quit…

I said good day!

BTW… Where's Codex Mo been? Isn't this sort of discussion right up his alley?

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
As far as the ratings system goes, I think it's total bunk. I gaurantee it doesn't make any difference whatsoever to 99.9% of adult gamers, and barely makes a difference to "discerning parents."

The folks who make The Witcher seem to think the ratings matter. Isn't that why they're adjusting the content?

I agree about it not making a difference to the majority of adult gamers though. Seriously, how often do you consciously look at a games parental rating?

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
When a store played German music, customers (no doubt oblivious to the influence) purchased German wine, when French music played, they followed suit with French wine.

Poor example, we're not exactly talking about wine here. And AFAIK The Witcher is Polish.

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
The type of proof you evidentally are looking for doesn't exist, because we can't read peoples' minds!

Well we're not exactly in the dark either. Phsychology has made major advances in the last 100 years. Instead of playing amateur psychologist yourself maybe you should ask some experts and listen what they have to say.

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
Sure there is no way to know all of the ins and outs of a killer's brain and what makes him tick…

Certainly not violent videogames/movies. Someone who is stimulated into committing a crime after playing a videogame/watching a movie is equally likely to be stimulated by any of 1,000,000 other daily perceptions, be as simple as a provocatively dressed lady or you looking at him the wrong way or as complex as studying the biographies of certain personalities in history books. As chamr already pointed out those are symptoms, not the cause.

According to your logic, we should immediately ban 'The Silence of the Lambs'. Instead we awarded it with 5 Oscars and 34 other prizes.

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
Do I think the world would be a safer place without it and 500,000 other violent games out there? YES.

In fact totalitarian regimes with strict censorship and a near-zero crime rate have been known to exist. The problem is that when they eventually explode, the body count is so high that you can't justify any of the sacrifices made.

As to what would make the world a safer place? IMHO better educated people would.

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
I weep for the species.

Sure.

Jabber: Ratings mattered for me as a kid, as I knew that I might get something with too complex mechanics if I went for something recommended for those five years older than me So ratings can be a helpful guideline if grounded in reality…

Originally Posted by Lethal Weapon
In fact totalitarian regimes with strict censorship and a near-zero crime rate have been known to exist. The problem is that when they eventually explode, the body count is so high that you can't justify any of the sacrifices made..

Couldnt agree more. Not only that, but one could argue that such regimes are committing acts against the citizens that would be criminal if other citizens were the perpetrators, like locking up or shooting people who are in disagreement.

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
I'm sorry that you want to continue chamr, because I for one am done with this discussion.

Sorry. Wasn't aware of that. I'll make this my last post then…

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
Numerous psychological experiments have proven the effects of outside influences on thought patterns and decision making. For instance there was an experiment on the influence of music on customers' decisions to purchase certain brands of wine. When a store played German music, customers (no doubt oblivious to the influence) purchased German wine, when French music played, they followed suit with French wine.

Influence is not cause. You claimed cause in the beginning. Now you claim simple influence. A pretty significant shift in your position.

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
The type of proof you evidentally are looking for doesn't exist, because we can't read peoples' minds! Sure there is no way to know all of the ins and outs of a killer's brain and what makes him tick, but if it has been documented and observed that certain influences cause certain reactions (e.g. the wine experiment), what part about this is so hard for you to believe?

Of course I believe in the concept of influence. See my previous post on cause. And, by the way, there is plenty of proof in that there have been many studies on causal relationships in violent behavior, and not one has found that violent media is a direct or primary cause for criminally violent behavior. While absence of proof is not necessarily a proof in itself, I believe with the amount of research on the subject done at this point, we can be reasonably assured that there is no, direct causal link from violent mediat to criminally violent behavior.

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
… and barely makes a difference to "discerning parents." And that goes back to the whole 'parents as mentors' idea. While there are diligent parents fulfilling their roles well, like dte no doubt, I have also seen plenty of children in R rated movies, and plenty of children renting R rated videos, and buying M rated games with their parents. Heck, we buy 'em toy guns when they're barely old enough to walk and teach 'em how to shoot the 'bad guys'!

This is gross overstatement. What evidence, beyond your own, anecdotal variety, can you point to that says the rating systems is failure in helping parents make decisions on which media are appropriate for their children? And are you suggesting that because you've seen children in an R-rated movie that this means most parents are abdicating their responsibilities? Or even a significant number?

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
Sure it's the parents responsibility, and their right to decide what's best for their children, but considering what i believe to be compelling evidence that these things can can influence children negatively, I think that it puts society at greater risk than if these things were simply not available.

Again, having a negative influence on children and putting society at large in greater danger is a huge leap to make. Huge.

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
Do I want to play the Witcher? Sure! Do I think the world would be a safer place without it and 500,000 other violent games out there? YES.

The government-driven effort to censor in any broad manner is doomed to fail, as so many attempts in the past should instruct us. It is impossible for a government to effectively draw the line. How much is too much? How much is too little? Who decides?

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
I said good day!

I said, GOOD DAY! ahh…. I LOVE that movie….

Originally Posted by Lethal Weapon
Poor example, we're not exactly talking about wine here. And AFAIK The Witcher is Polish.

You're right, I should have referenced an experiment that didn't just use audible influences, but SIGHT as well, since we are talking about a game that you see hear, and interact with. I'm sure that would be much less influencing than just hearing music, don't you?

And I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were so literal minded so as to not understand that I was relating a real world experiment that happened to involve German and French wines, and is in no way associated with the make-believe world of The Witcher. But if it makes you feel better we can change it to Polish wine, 'kay?

Originally Posted by chamr
Influence is not cause. You claimed cause in the beginning. Now you claim simple influence. A pretty significant shift in your position.

If that's what you are concluding, then I guess I really didn't make myself clear in previous posts. I am and have always been talking about influence(s). Perhaps what you are referring regarding my posts, is that I believe that all of these influences, whatever they may be, can eventually add up to an action, and therefore those influences become a 'cause.' Perhaps there can't be any single distinguishing cause psychologically identified, but everything adds up.

Take a person that gives in to road rage and pulls a gun on the other driver involved. Did that one incident make him do that? Probably not, it may have been the 15 other drivers that cut him off that morning, maybe he just got fired, maybe etc…. Those are all events, or 'things', that influenced his irrational behaviour. What I am suggesting is that playing a game in which a person acts out violence could also be one of those influences, and seems likely to me given that since such a game invariably triggers aggressive responses. Now of course I agree that a person would have to have psychological troubles to begin with to do something that stupid, or 'crazy' if you will, and I've said that all along. But maybe he wouldn't have been pushed over that fragile limit if he hadn't already gotten used to pulling guns out in a fantasy world. Of course such a piece of the causal equation is immeasurable, I understand that. I'm just trying to get you to see that it is possible.

Originally Posted by chamr
Of course I believe in the concept of influence. See my previous post on cause. And, by the way, there is plenty of proof in that there have been many studies on causal relationships in violent behavior, and not one has found that violent media is a direct or primary cause for criminally violent behavior. While absence of proof is not necessarily a proof in itself, I believe with the amount of research on the subject done at this point, we can be reasonably assured that there is no, direct causal link from violent mediat to criminally violent behavior.

And again, I think that's where our misunderstanding lies… I never intended to sound like I was asserting that little johnny plays a bad video game and instantly has the urge to shoot somebody.

Originally Posted by chamr
This is gross overstatement. What evidence, beyond your own, anecdotal variety, can you point to that says the rating systems is failure in helping parents make decisions on which media are appropriate for their children? And are you suggesting that because you've seen children in an R-rated movie that this means most parents are abdicating their responsibilities? Or even a significant number?

Of course I qualified my "gross overstatement" by prefacing it with the phrase "I think." And yes, I stand by that statement concerning parents. I don't mean to insult any parents here or anyone who feels their parents did a good job in raising them.. but I sincerely do feel that a significant number of parents are not doing a good job in raising children to become responsible adults. My feelings are not based on a single event or observation like you are suggesting.

Originally Posted by chamr
Again, having a negative influence on children and putting society at large in greater danger is a huge leap to make. Huge.

What exactly do you think makes up "society at large"? Is "society at large" a mass of people who were never children once and who were never exposed to harmful influence?

And I think the key word here is "greater". I agree - greater, not great. I never (thought) I implied that the world was going to implode because of too many video games.

Originally Posted by chamr
The government-driven effort to censor in any broad manner is doomed to fail, as so many attempts in the past should instruct us. It is impossible for a government to effectively draw the line. How much is too much? How much is too little? Who decides?

I couldn't agree more, but unlike you (apparently) I feel that the world situation is getting worse, and that's the reason I said earlier "I weep for the species."

I've tried to be as clear as possible in this post on where I stand. I don't expect you or anyone else to agree, as I can't fathom your reasoning and you can't fathom mine. but there's no need for insults, or for this particular conversation to continue any longer. I hope that any negative feelings from this thread will not spill over into others.

As I mentioned in a reply in the thread at the codex, I'll be importing the UK version myself as I have no interest whatsoever in fundamentalist christian religious thumper nutcase censoring, especially if the only things that they are going to bother to censor are TV, radio, movies, and games while ignoring all other forms of media.

EDIT:
Decided to edit this a little further as to specifics, I HIGHLY doubt that they just censored nipples, as I fully expect any text/dialog/etc. that would also be objectionable to that same fascist group will also be censored. Hell, if I spoke polish, I'd order the Polish version just to make sure that I got the REALLY full game, as also, on the codex thread, there was mention that the Polish version apparently has additional text/dialog relating to the books and implied that they were cut from other versions.

Damned thumpers are every bit as bad as psychotic muslims.

EDIT2:
OK, the censorship comment MAY be off as this is not censorship by any sort of legsilative decree or ratings board governing but it IS willing censorship by the publisher to achieve a particular rating, and so ends up overall in the gaming community as a de facto censorship policy to appease the fundamentalist christian demographic.

Zima:
Catholicism, remember ALL things in moderation. Catholicism has ALWAYS been pretty liberal for a large organized religion, well wrt most things although they do have persnickety and annoying stands based in their morality on some endeavors.

Originally Posted by cutterjohn
As I mentioned in a reply in the thread at the codex, I'll be importing the UK version myself as I have no interest whatsoever in fundamentalist christian religious thumper nutcase censoring, especially if the only things that they are going to bother to censor are TV, radio, movies, and games while ignoring all other forms of media.

Thing to remember - no one censored The Witcher except for Atari. This is not like Manhunt 2 where they were threatened with AO in the US and outright banning elsewhere, which meant commercial death .. and chose to tweak for rating. The Witcher was never threatened with anything, it was self-initiated.

I'm not going to take the time to read this entire thread, I just want to ask a question.

Has it been confirmed as fact that the US version will definitely be censored?

Yes. Someone posted this link to a thread on the game's official forums with details.

I'm really upset at censorship. I thought the M rated US game was untouched since an age minimum comes with the rating. Thanks for telling us that the M rating was altered, I got the Import after cancelling the US version.
Being told what to read or not is one of many issues about our freedom(s) here. I expected more national debate but times have changed and the rage is silent. This thread is about a symptom of a possible New Dark Age.

Originally Posted by txa1265
Thing to remember - no one censored The Witcher except for Atari. This is not like Manhunt 2 where they were threatened with AO in the US and outright banning elsewhere, which meant commercial death .. and chose to tweak for rating. The Witcher was never threatened with anything, it was self-initiated.

c.f. EDIT2

I have a question about the import versions. For instance, if i ordered the game thru the UK site. Is the game in English? Or are the subtitles in English? If i order the import version, i want to make sure that i can understand the dialogue. Thanks.

They do speak English in the UK, so yes, it will be in English.

Originally Posted by Prime Junta
They do speak English in the UK, so yes, it will be in English.

You call that English?!?!