Truck Month Textbook Trade In Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Sixx AM Fire TV with 4k Ultra HD Beauty Mother's Day Gifts Amazon Gift Card Offer ctstrph2 ctstrph2 ctstrph2  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Fire, Only $39.99 Kindle Paperwhite AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Shop Now SnS
Customer Discussions > Games forum


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1051-1075 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Posted on Mar 29, 2011 3:33:24 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 29, 2011 4:09:54 AM PDT
Mr. R. Gee says:
I noticed that someone brought up GTA. The last GTA game (GTAIV), the sexual content was non-existant. You date a girl and once you get to her inviting you into her house all she does is invite you in for coffee and unlike previous GTA games there is no indication whatsoever that sex is going on. You also go to strip bars, where you can get a lap dance, yet in this lap dance there is absolutely no nakedness, the girls are scantily clad but that is as far as it goes. All this, in my opinion detracts from the game and turns a brilliant game into a joke. This game is rated M, why is there no sexual content in the game??? I'll tell you why, it is because the games producers know damn well that the game will fall into adolescent hands because a lot of parents (not all) don't care what their kids play as long as it keeps them quiet and out from under the feet.

Posted on Mar 29, 2011 8:35:08 AM PDT
R. J. Satori says:
This thread is so tiresome. The same few voices stand out now as did a year ago, amidst a steady current of unthinking regurgitated popular sentiment. Sometimes I feel like jumping back in, but I don't know to what purpose.... the amusement of the three or four people who have subscribed to the thread seeing me tilt at the windmill again?

No wonder the regulatory systems we have are such a mess.

Posted on Mar 29, 2011 10:58:55 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 29, 2011 11:00:25 AM PDT
Anything should be allowed in a game from Sex to Drugs to Violence to Profanity. The notion that viewing and playing these things is harmful comes from female centered Non-Profits and right wingers who believe that the State knows best than the individual. If parents are concerned then they have the responsibility to not purchase the items for their kids and educate their kids on what is appropriate and not appropriate in real life. It's that simple. Video Games are entertainment just like movies and music. And just like movies and music, they are works of art. No one has a right to dictate what I can or cannot see, especially when it is victimless. And no one has a right to dictate what an artist can or cannot express.

Posted on Mar 29, 2011 2:04:53 PM PDT
Absolutely it should be.
You can't have one type of game, but then ban or restrict another type. Violent games have been around for ages and while it may be "cartoon violence" in most cases, games are becoming more and more realistic with ther depicitions of violence. Sexual content is such a huge taboo in the United States that it has its own rating AO for Adults Only, which marks the game as a pariah in the retail community. It is time that we lightened up about what we depict in games and realize that adding sexual content to a game may be considered obscene, but its the responsibility of the parent to make sure if they don't want their kids playing the game to make sure they don't play it.

Posted on Mar 29, 2011 5:29:00 PM PDT
Facelord says:
Go play Sexy Beach 3.

Anyways, I think one of the most tasteful sex scenes I've ever seen occurred completely off-screen, wasn't really mentioned later, it was very subtle; when I was a kid I didn't realize what'd happened, I only got it a few months ago. It was in Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, when Bruce Wayne totally boned his girlfriend in the ass. I recommend that movie very highly.

Posted on Mar 30, 2011 7:57:32 AM PDT
P. Taegel says:
The video game rating system is pretty strict. An M rated game can get away with loads of violence, but only very minimal amounts of sex or nudity. (Generally along the lines of a PG-13 movie) Too much sex will garner a game an AO (adults only) rating. Major retailers won't pick it up and the game simply won't sell. Hence, the raciest thing you'll ever see is a bare boob or two -- and usually not that.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 31, 2011 3:49:04 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 31, 2011 3:52:34 PM PDT
B. Eddy says:
Dead on the number Church07. I aggree with your entire statement and have seen it myself. Most Parents are too stupid to read the box, and most are tohung up on themselves to try to explain "why" the kid can't have it, so they let them to not be bothered themselves. Get your crap together parents. It is ok to allow your children violent and sex themed games if you so choose, but be SURE, Positive!!, that the children understand this is a GAME. Not real life.If they can't understand that, then they probably shouldn't be playing those kinds of games.
And yes i have kids and games DUH.

Church07's Post was this: I do believe its un-needed. However saying we have a "moral" responsibility to keep sex out of video games is quite frankly childish along the lines of some W's I know. Morals are too different in this country, if your talking from coast to coast, or religion to religion. So whats good for your house hold doesn't get brought to mine.

It is the parent's responsibility to either buy it, or don't buy it. And I'm sick of hearing crap about how "kids will buy it anyway" Yeah? So monitor your kids well. And besides monitoring, lets all try something, its called leading by example. If little Timmy wants the sex/shooter game he saw at little Billy's house, than don't tell him he can't have it "cause I said so damnit" explain it to him. Even if he doesn't understand he gets that this isn't a case of a parent just being a jerk. Its Mom and Dad's job to bring their kids up. So don't argue over ratings vs parenting. The ratings are tools for parents, most of which are too stupid to read the box.

Posted on Jun 27, 2011 3:59:10 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 27, 2011 4:03:17 PM PDT
R. J. Satori says:
At the risk of inviting more of the same old same old, I wanted to post about something that happenned today related to a subject brought up in some of the latter pages of this thread:



WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that a California law banning the sale of violent videogames to minors is unconstitutional.

The court, on a 7-2 vote, said the law violated free speech protections of the First Amendment. "Even where the protection of children is the object, the constitutional limits on governmental action apply," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in an 18-page opinion, which was joined by four other justices. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito concurred in the result but expressed some disagreement with the majority's opinion.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer dissented.

California lawmakers passed the ban in 2005 after finding that violent videogames are "a new, modern threat to children" that cause psychological harm and make minors more likely to exhibit violent or aggressive behavior.

The case carried considerable implications for the videogame industry. Games rated as "mature," such as Activision Blizzard Inc.'s (ATVI) "Call of Duty" and Take-Two Interactive Software Inc.'s (TTWO) "Grand Theft Auto," are some of the industry's biggest sellers.

Two trade associations challenged the law before it went into effect. The industry says American consumers spend more than $10 billion a year on videogames.

It's not clear which games would have been affected by California's law, which defines a violent video game as one that "includes killing, maiming, dismembering or sexually assaulting an image of a human being."

To be subject to the sales ban, the game must lack "serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors," or it must allow a player to virtually inflict serious injury in a manner that is "especially heinous, cruel or depraved in that it involves torture or serious physical abuse to the victim."

The law would have imposed a fine of up to $1,000 for each violation.


Yeah, violence not sex being hyped here but the ban was imposed on the basis of current-style box ratings that are all-encompassing and oversimplified. The California ban came up here in relation to my assertions that there was no government ban in effect, regardless of retailer policies -- apparently in California, there was. Luckily, it turns out sometimes our system works.

And now we have precedent in favour of freedom.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 27, 2011 10:16:30 PM PDT
Bj Raz says:
Our world is SO wacky.... *shakes head*
At least if it doesn't come out in the wash, it comes out in the rinse. :)

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 11, 2012 10:51:05 AM PDT
I think that, as the law currently stands. developers should be able to put whatever they want into games. It is your responsibility to speak with your wallet about what you will and won't buy and what you do and don't want in your games. Personally, I don't particularly want explicit sexual content in my games, but I was fine with the way that a game like Mass Effect handled sexuality. If people disagree, they should elect not to purchase games they don't want. If enough people agree, games with that content will not be made.

In reply to an earlier post on May 2, 2012 11:23:14 AM PDT
Randy O'dell says:
I also agree. Just like controlling what your kids see on TV. Change the channel or block it. But should not eliminate these games for those who enjoy it. Be a parent and control what your child see's or plays. Do not rely on others to do it for you.

Posted on May 2, 2012 11:25:38 AM PDT
Randy O'dell says:
I also agree. Just like controlling what your kids see on TV. Change the channel or block it. But should not eliminate these games for those who enjoy it. Be a parent and control what your child see's or plays. Do not rely on others to do it for you.

In reply to an earlier post on May 2, 2012 10:22:17 PM PDT
kelly mendez says:
so true

Posted on Jun 9, 2012 1:37:01 AM PDT
Cathy says:
i will make this simple. i am 35 and plays games. why should what i want in a game not be put in? they make games for kids, for teens. so why not adult games? they have adult magazines, movies, toys, so why not games? why should i have to not have what i want? if you don't want it fine, don't get it. and do your job as a parent and teach your children. don't make other people suffer because you don't want to do your job. sorry for the small rant, but i get tired of this debate. people are differnt and want different things. one group should not have to suffer because another doesn't agree. or says one thing and want someone else to do what they are to lazy to do.

Posted on Sep 7, 2012 7:11:51 PM PDT
What kind of person would want sexual content in a video game? Twisted.

Posted on Sep 7, 2012 7:25:43 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 7, 2012 7:28:13 PM PDT
Sha Gojyo says:

no, since people buy their 7 - 15 year old kids rated M games without useing good judgment skills.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 7, 2012 7:26:53 PM PDT
MrImmoli says:
What kind of person would want sexual content in a movie or book? Twisted.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 7, 2012 7:45:06 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Sep 7, 2012 7:48:37 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 7, 2012 7:56:48 PM PDT
Sha Gojyo says:
EDIT: you think GTA is bad? have you played Red Dead Redemption? there is a cut scene where they actually show a guy boinking a woman on a table, with her chest area exposed and her legs spread open to the guy as he boinks her (in a missionary position I think they call it). after seeing that, I was shocked and amazed that they actually showed that on the game.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 7, 2012 9:22:23 PM PDT
Bj Raz says:
I have to agree RJ, this topic almost almost 6 years old and still going strong. *shakes head and sighs*
I've had a life, I've not been reading it, but I'm sure its all the same as when I added my 2 cents.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 7, 2012 11:15:49 PM PDT
Any person that believes that good art IMITATES life. And in life sex is a fact of life. Do you deny it? If so you are nothing more than a delusional fundementalist. It baffles me that people get bothered about presenting a bodily function instead of seeing somebody's head chopped off.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 8, 2012 12:00:04 AM PDT
Sha Gojyo says:
are you saying that you think children that play video games should watch people have sex insted of killing fictional computer generated people? if so, then...I dunno what to say. wow?

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 8, 2012 12:30:07 AM PDT
Randy O'dell says:
No, it is just like watching television. You can chose what your children can watch. Screen the games before you buy them and play adult rated games when the children are a sleep or away. I dont let my kids watch anything that is purely for adults. So keep your kids safe.

Posted on Sep 8, 2012 11:28:19 AM PDT
Davidovich53 says:
So this thread came back to life... again?!

Anything anyone is saying on this thread has been said already. Every good point, every good observation, every scathing reproach of our society has been said already. Let's pack it in already!

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 8, 2012 4:55:46 PM PDT
Randy O'dell says:
Then why are you at this site then? Why don't you As you say Pack it IN. And leave us alone.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the Games forum (116 discussions)


This discussion

Discussion in:  Games forum
Participants:  474
Total posts:  1131
Initial post:  Oct 1, 2007
Latest post:  Jul 31, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 26 customers

Search Customer Discussions