Support NeoGAF

[Dragona Akehi]

While we're at we should boycott ever horror game and movie based on H.P. Lovecraft's work as well. He was a well known racist.

As has been repeated countless times:

1) Lovecraft is dead. He never made any money on his novels during his lifetime either.

2) Even if the above were not true, as far as we know he did not head the "Negroes aren't People" organisation with the aim of depriving them of rights.

 

[elrechazado]

If OSC simply spouted his silly views wherever he wished and was not involved financially or politicly, then I would not care. That's his prerogative.

Do you take the same stand against all organizations that band together to accomplish political goals? Back when Thurgood Marshall was GC of the NAACP during the civil rights era, would you have said "If Marshal simply spouted his silly views wherever he wished and was not involved financially or politically, then I would not care." ?

What you're really saying is "people who I disagree with are allowed to have their views but they really should never talk to others about them, join up with others who share them, or ever be involved in the political process."

Some of us welcome open debate, and recognize that the great political traditions of free speech and the free exchange of ideas in society means the same for all.

 

[KHarvey16]

While we're at we should boycott ever horror game and movie based on H.P. Lovecraft's work as well. He was a well known racist.

Oh he's alive and potentially in a position to affect policy on race relations? Or did you just totally miss the point?

 

[Divvy]

Do you take the same stand against all organizations that band together to accomplish political goals? Back when Thurgood Marshall was GC of the NAACP during the civil rights era, would you have said "If Marshal simply spouted his silly views wherever he wished and was not involved financially or politically, then I would not care." ?

What you're really saying is "people who I disagree with are allowed to have their views but they really should never talk to others about them, join up with others who share them, or ever be involved in the political process."

Some of us welcome open debate, and recognize that the great political traditions of free speech and the free exchange of ideas in society means the same for all.

She never said they weren't allowed. She stated that if they did so, then she personally would not want to fund their actions.

 

[KHarvey16]

Do you take the same stand against all organizations that band together to accomplish political goals? Back when Thurgood Marshall was GC of the NAACP during the civil rights era, would you have said "If Marshal simply spouted his silly views wherever he wished and was not involved financially or politically, then I would not care." ?

What you're really saying is "people who I disagree with are allowed to have their views but they really should never talk to others about them, join up with others who share them, or ever be involved in the political process."

Some of us welcome open debate, and recognize that the great political traditions of free speech and the free exchange of ideas in society means the same for all.

So how much money do you donate to the opposing political party, hypocrite?

It's like we're speaking in tongues.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Do you take the same stand against all organizations that band together to accomplish political goals? Back when Thurgood Marshall was GC of the NAACP during the civil rights era, would you have said "If Marshal simply spouted his silly views wherever he wished and was not involved financially or politically, then I would not care." ?

What you're really saying is "people who I disagree with are allowed to have their views but they really should never talk to others about them, join up with others who share them, or ever be involved in the political process."

Some of us welcome open debate, and recognize that the great political traditions of free speech and the free exchange of ideas in society means the same for all.

He has the right of free speech, free assembly and everything else. He is even free to do what he is doing.

I have the right to not purchase goods or services by him for the same reason.

 

[elrechazado]

So how much money do you donate to the opposing political party, hypocrite?

It's like we're speaking in tongues.

You seem to be quite angry, friend. The heckler's veto seems to be in play quite often in this thread.

I actually donate money and my personal time to organizations including the ACLU that defend the rights of free speech to people and causes that I personally abhor. These concepts seem to be well over your head though, to be kind.

 

[senahorse]

Just out of curiosity, to those people boycotting Shadow Complex. Do you pay taxes? If so, how do you feel about that? As I am sure many of the choices your particular goverment may make may not be in the best interests of the people but merely the political agenda of a few.

Don't get me wrong, I am 100% on your side in being against some of OSC's beliefs but there are many more evil people around the world that I am sure you are willingly giving money. However in most cases you are unaware of it, does that make it any more right or wrong? Infact if you feel so strongly about where your money goes, shouldn't you be researching the character of the person profiting from you in every purchase you make? That last sentence is probably taking things a bit too far I am sure you get my point.

 

[Gantz]

As has been repeated countless times:

1) Lovecraft is dead. He never made any money on his novels during his lifetime either.

2) Even if the above were not true, as far as we know he did not head the "Negroes aren't People" organisation with the aim of depriving them of rights.

So how much is OSC making off Shadow Complex? How much of these royalties are going to the anti-gay organization?

 

[elrechazado]

He has the right of free speech, free assembly and everything else. He is even free to do what he is doing.

I have the right to not purchase goods or services by him for the same reason.

That's nice, and I certainly agree with this post now. But it's not what you said previously, and I was talking about your own internal logic, not positing that you were a government actor who could actually prohibit the speech.

 

[Coins]

Do you take the same stand against all organizations that band together to accomplish political goals? Back when Thurgood Marshall was GC of the NAACP during the civil rights era, would you have said "If Marshal simply spouted his silly views wherever he wished and was not involved financially or politically, then I would not care." ?

What you're really saying is "people who I disagree with are allowed to have their views but they really should never talk to others about them, join up with others who share them, or ever be involved in the political process."

Some of us welcome open debate, and recognize that the great political traditions of free speech and the free exchange of ideas in society means the same for all.

No one said he doesnt have the right to have an opinion. This is a great country because he is allowed to express it. As consumers, its fully within our right to not want our money to go towards his causes, though. Thats fully within our right. I would also not buy a product from peope associated with David Duke, etc.

They should talk to others about their views, they should join up with others about their views and they should most definitely be involved in the polical process. Its their rights as Americans and they should use those rights. Some of us just dont ant to give him our money. Lets stop with this "oh, they like free speech until it involves something their against" because thats not what anyone is saying at all.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

So how much is OSC making off Shadow Complex? How much of these royalties are going to the anti-gay organization?

Regardless of what OSC is making from SC, he was hired by Chair. I am therefore declining to purchase items or services by Chair on account of their business relationship with him.

That's nice, and I certainly agree with this post now. But it's not what you said previously, and I was talking about your own internal logic, not positing that you were a government actor who could actually prohibit the speech.

There is always the question of when it is time to react accordingly. Should OSC just be the batshit insane person he is, without spearheading anti-gay prerogatives with his amounts of money, I probably would not be against purchasing something that has had his involvement.

Since he has, I have decided to take what little personal action I can.

 

[KHarvey16]

You seem to be quite angry, friend. The heckler's veto seems to be in play quite often in this thread.

I actually donate money and my personal time to organizations including the ACLU that defend the rights of free speech to people and causes that I personally abhor. These concepts seem to be well over your head though, to be kind.

:lol

Yeah, I'm the one who can't understand what's going on. Good call sir.

 

[cvxfreak]

Shadow Complex sounds like a good game, but unfortunately for its developer, publisher and affiliates, there is no shortage of good games out there.

No buy for me. Card's stance on homosexuality is despicable.

 

[ZephyrFate]

That's nice, and I certainly agree with this post now. But it's not what you said previously, and I was talking about your own internal logic, not positing that you were a government actor who could actually prohibit the speech.

It is completely fine to boycott a game created partially by someone who perpetuates hateful agendas against someone. This is also part of free, open speech.

 

[Coins]

stuff about taxes

Not paying taxes is illegal.

 

[elrechazado]

:lol

Yeah, I'm the one who can't understand what's going on. Good call sir.

That's two posts in a row that have said exactly nothing, and certainly not responded to the way I completely dismantled your little straw men, but I'm sure your little self congratulatory post has nothing to do with the fact that you just came off like a fool.

 

[KHarvey16]

We also have an influence on what our taxes are used for through our system of government.

 

[Ulairi]

If we want games to be treated as art and not just products we have to allow artists with whom we disagree to create their art. We can then experience their art and use it as a point of discussion. Otherwise, we are treating games as products.

 

[KHarvey16]

That's two posts in a row that have said exactly nothing, and certainly not responded to the way I completely dismantled your little straw men, but I'm sure your little self congratulatory post has nothing to do with the fact that you just came off like a fool.

You're so cute :lol.

You didn't say anything worth responding to more so then I already have. The fact you felt it was worth sharing demonstrates to most of us you wouldn't understand why it was useless.

 

[elrechazado]

It is completely fine to boycott a game created partially by someone who perpetuates hateful agendas against someone. This is also part of free, open speech.

Know what's amazing? That I never said that it was. For all the "omg how many times do we have to debunk this argument in this thread", some of you seem to enjoy projecting the same shitty arguments onto every post that disagrees with you.

Perhaps you should review the post to which I was replaying, then my reply, and find where I said that anyone should be restricted from a boycott.

 

[Coins]

If we want games to be treated as art and not just products we have to allow artists with whom we disagree to create their art. We can then experience their art and use it as a point of discussion. Otherwise, we are treating games as products.

No one said he cant create anything.

 

[Divvy]

If we want games to be treated as art and not just products we have to allow artists with whom we disagree to create their art. We can then experience their art and use it as a point of discussion. Otherwise, we are treating games as products.

Games are products.

 

[elrechazado]

You didn't say anything worth responding to more so then I already have.

If you were speaking English maybe we wouldn't have so many communication problems. I don't know what that even means.

 

[Aruarian Reflection]

I bought the game just because of this thread.

 

[KHarvey16]

If you were speaking English maybe we wouldn't have so many communication problems. I don't know what that even means.

Read it slower? I don't know what to tell you.

 

[methos75]

While we're at we should boycott ever horror game and movie based on H.P. Lovecraft's work as well. He was a well known racist.

So was Howard, should we ban Conan? Hell your great Grandfather at that time was probably raciest, seeing as how most were back then.

 

[elrechazado]

Read it slower? I don't know what to tell you.

If you really want a grammar lesson on the difference between than and then, or the appropriateness of the word "so" in that sentence, I can teach you, but I don't think you have a very open mind at the moment. Maybe someone else will help you out.

 

[KHarvey16]

If you really want a grammar lesson on the difference between than and then, or the appropriateness of the word "so" in that sentence, I can teach you, but I don't think you have a very open mind at the moment. Maybe someone else will help you out.

Thanks! I guess I won't begrudge you your victory there, you certainly needed it more than I.

 

[Divvy]

You two need a time out or something.

 

[charsace]

This thread is so funny. Most of you arguing against the OP can't even comprehend what he is trying to convey in his post.

 

[elrechazado]

You two need a time out or something.

I tried to have a rational discourse, but some people on both sides in this thread just want to hang out and sling shit around, sadly. Pretty easy to read the sequence of posts. Ahh well, such is the internet.

 

[KHarvey16]

You two need a time out or something.

But we're just getting to the "grammar criticism" part of the show!

I just get extremely frustrated by the complete and utter refusal to read and attempt to understand viewpoints in a thread like this. Implying that not buying a product over the opinions and conduct of one of its creators is somehow an attempt to infringe upon the freedom of speech doesn't help either.

 

[Margalis]

Peter David makes zero sense. I say that as a Peter David fan.

My disagreements with Orson's politics are hardly limited to his views on gays; we are at opposite ends of the political spectrum on pretty much everything. Why, then, did I agree to work on the game? Because among my most cherished beliefs is that , while I disagree with everything you have to say, I will defend to the death your right to say it.

This goes beyond Orson's repellant personal beliefs. Shadow Complex is based on a book of conservative propaganda. Even if you limit your criticisms to the Empire books and leave out everything Card has said and done in his life you still have plenty of ammo.

Empire is a masturbatory right-wing fantasy in which evil liberals in "blue states" try to take over the US, while heroic Fox-News watching red-meat eaters valiantly fight against them. What?

Why would you base a game on a book that holds half the population of the United States in contempt? This is not satire or intelligent commentary. You don't have to read Card's personal essays to find incriminating material, it's written into Empire:

“Yeah,” said Cole. “The terrorists are crazy and scary, but what really pisses me off is knowing that this will make a whole bunch of European intellectuals very happy.”
...
“You’re forgetting that nobody cares what Europeans think except a handful of American intellectuals who are every bit as anti-American as the French,” said Malich.

The entire point of the book is to let Card have some fictional cyphers express his personal beliefs. What the characters Cole and Malich say above is exactly what Card believes.

Peter David might have a point if Empire was a great book worth exploring in game form but Card had some objectionable personal beliefs he expressed in other media. But he's expressing them in the book itself. A book that is terribly written and all-around awful.

Freedom of speech includes the right to buy or not buy what you please and right to inform others that a game is based on right-wing propaganda by a bigoted author who last wrote something worthwhile before many reading this were born.

Lovecraft and Howard (both of which I love as authors) were not propagandists and both were products of their times. (And both were a million times better than Empire-era Card) That said, if Solomon Kane had been written last year and someone based a game on it this year I would greatly question their judgement. (Given that it's full of racist tropes)

 

[elrechazado]

But we're just getting to the "grammar criticism" part of the show!

I just get extremely frustrated by the complete and utter refusal to read and attempt to understand viewpoints in a thread like this. Implying that not buying a product over the opinions and conduct of one of its creators is somehow an attempt to infringe upon the freedom of speech doesn't help either.

allow myself to quote myself, since you want to keep making shit up.

Know what's amazing? That I never said that it was. For all the "omg how many times do we have to debunk this argument in this thread", some of you seem to enjoy projecting the same shitty arguments onto every post that disagrees with you.

Perhaps you should review the post to which I was replaying, then my reply, and find where I said that anyone should be restricted from a boycott.

 

[Technoob]

OP would have a lot less people jumping his shit if he had simply said "here's why I plan to boycott this game"

 

[KHarvey16]

allow myself to quote myself, since you want to keep making shit up.

Oh, so this:

Some of us welcome open debate, and recognize that the great political traditions of free speech and the free exchange of ideas in society means the same for all.

...is not intended to mean the opinion expressed by Dragona is somehow contrary to the things you mention here? I'm afraid the problem is not with my abilities of comprehension. You say "some of us." Who doesn't belong to that group? Who doesn't welcome open debate or the traditions of free speech?

 

[Dipper145]

Hell your great Grandfather at that time was probably raciest, seeing as how most were back then.

Hey now, my Grandfather is still racist thank you very much.

 

[methos75]

Peter David makes zero sense. I say that as a Peter David fan.



This goes beyond Orson's repellant personal beliefs. Shadow Complex is based on a book of conservative propaganda. Even if you limit your criticisms to the Empire books and leave out everything Card has said and done in his life you still have plenty of ammo.

Empire is a masturbatory right-wing fantasy in which evil liberals in "blue states" try to take over the US, while heroic Fox-News watching red-meat eaters valiantly fight against them. What?

Why would you base a game on a book that holds half the population of the United States in contempt? This is not satire or intelligent commentary. You don't have to read Card's personal essays to find incriminating material, it's written into Empire:



The entire point of the book is to let Card have some fictional cyphers express his personal beliefs. What the characters Cole and Malich say above is exactly what Card believes.

Peter David might have a point if Empire was a great book worth exploring in game form but Card had some objectionable personal beliefs he expressed in other media. But he's expressing them in the book itself. A book that is terribly written and all-around awful.

Freedom of speech includes the right to buy or not buy what you please and right to inform others that a game is based on right-wing propaganda by a bigoted author who last wrote something worthwhile before many reading this were born.

Lovecraft and Howard (both of which I love as authors) were not propagandists and both were products of their times. (And both were a million times better than Empire-era Card) That said, if Solomon Kane had been written last year and someone based a game on it this year I would greatly question their judgement. (Given that it's full of racist tropes)

So this game is about a true american hero fighting evil Libs? Its a must buy now :-D

 

[elrechazado]

Oh, so this:



...is not intended to mean the opinion expressed by Dragona is somehow contrary to the things you mention here? I'm afraid the problem is not with my abilities of comprehension. You say "some of us." Who doesn't belong to that group? Who doesn't welcome open debate or the traditions of free speech?

Did you actually read that, or just project what you wanted someone to be saying onto my post? Because it's amazing how the goalposts go flying the fuck around. It's pretty easy for someone who speaks english to read the post I replied to, read my post, and the subsequent discussion where it is clear that I never implied any such thing and that I was discussing the apparent inconsistency between two evidently competing values in her post. But that would require, well....reading. The best example you have is that you assumed that I was implying something that I never said. Good job.

Because you seem to be projecting your bullshit about me saying that people shouldn't boycott:

The subsequent post:

He has the right of free speech, free assembly and everything else. He is even free to do what he is doing.

I have the right to not purchase goods or services by him for the same reason.

and my subsequent freedom hating, anti boycott reply:

That's nice, and I certainly agree with this post now. But it's not what you said previously, and I was talking about your own internal logic, not positing that you were a government actor who could actually prohibit the speech.

 

[drakesfortune]

Oh he's alive and potentially in a position to affect policy on race relations? Or did you just totally miss the point?

Oh come on now, this is crazy. He's in a position to affect policy? What?? If anything this controversy has slightly elevated his stature from completely unknown, to known by a few internet geeks. Obama, who's actively campaigned against gay marriage, used the issue to help elevate him to the most powerful position in the land, isn't in a place to affect policy, but this guy is somehow the head of some organization more powerful than the presidency. Seriously. Seriously? Really?

When you guys hold Obama to the same criteria as this guy, then I'll believe your outrage. When you stop voting for him, because he's campaigned and dealt a bigger blow to gay marriage than OSC could ever dream of doing, then let's talk. Until then, it's a one way street, where you forgive Obama for crushing gay marriage under his foot, and hold some guy I hadn't even heard of before this stupid controversy up to a higher standard than the president of the united states (which, you know, really does affect policy).

I know, I know, the hypocrisy should be ignored because of some difference that us lay people in internet land fail to understand. It's video games, serious business, over the president, which is not serious business. We shouldn't believe Obama, even though he says gay marriage is wrong, he really means something else, we shouldn't believe his words, instead we should "hope" he'll do the right thing in the future and actively campaign to legalize gay marriage.

And again, I'm PRO gay marriage. Actually, I'm the rare pro gay marriage, anti death penalty conservative. :lol :lol I have no home. I say live and let live, I don't give a flying fuck what two dudes or two gals do on their own time. I really don't. I have gay friends. So I do not give a shit. I voted Republican, and they had the same position as Obama on this matter, and now you'll say I'm a hypocrite, except, I'm not boycotting this game. That's the difference. In fact, I bought it tonight (I always planned to buy it though), and it's really good.

The fact of the matter is that OSC's position on gay marriage is more mainstream than the consensus here on NeoGaf. We'd all like to think the public is where we are on the issue, but they are not. They. Are. Not. Period. He's expressing a view that's quite mainstream. Wrong, but mainstream. We buy products EVERY day from people who hold these views, and if they had the platform that OSC has, many would raise them.

 

[Coins]

Oh come on now, this is crazy. He's in a position to affect policy? What?? If anything this controversy has slightly elevated his stature from completely unknown, to known by a few internet geeks.

I stopped reading here as its apparent you dont know what youre talking about, who OSC is and what board he sits on (NOM).

Hes not completely unknown. Do some research.

 

[elrechazado]

I stopped reading here as its apparent you dont know what youre talking about, who OSC is and what board he sits on (NOM).

Hes not completely unknown. Do some research.

Maybe if you had read, you would have seen that he was making a distinction between an author whose views are not widely known, and people who certainly do have political power, such as the president.

 

[Duke Togo]

Shadow Complex sounds like a good game, but unfortunately for its developer, publisher and affiliates, there is no shortage of good games out there.

No buy for me. Card's stance on homosexuality is despicable.

Thanks for saving me the trouble of typing that out. Pretty much exactly my position.

 

[KHarvey16]

Did you actually read that, or just project what you wanted someone to be saying onto my post? Because it's amazing how the goalposts go flying the fuck around. It's pretty easy for someone who speaks english to read the post I replied to, read my post, and the subsequent discussion where it is clear that I never implied any such thing and that I was discussing the apparent inconsistency between two evidently competing values in her post. But that would require, well....reading. The best example you have is that you assumed that I was implying something that I never said. Good job.

You're certainly not expressing yourself clearly at all. I still don't understand what it is you're trying to say.

Dragona says she won't support a man who is in a position to use his influence and money to further his agenda, which includes removing rights from a fairly large portion of the population. You responded with what people are "allowed" to do when that was never once brought up. No one is claiming someone isn't allowed to do a damn thing. You then go on to note "some of us" appreciate free expression and open debate.

What "competing" values?

But it's not what you said previously

Yes it is!

 

[Truelize]

Shadow Complex is awesome guys. You are missing out.

But I guess sitting on a video game forum talking about this is much more fun.

 

[mollipen]

Again, why should they feel compelled to say anything? Why is bullying them for their stance something we should seek? It's eerie.

The reason (which I tried to express in my previous reply to you) is simple: it's good business to do so. Apple doesn't have to say publicly why they decided to ban an app from appearing in the iPhone app store, but lately they've said why a number of times. Comcast doesn't have to have a Twitter account where they try to help people who mention they're having issues with the company's products, but they do.

Chair doesn't have to say a damn thing about the situation and/or their relationship with Card, but it would be good business to do so, especially if nobody in the equation except Card is involved in the things Card is involved in. The fact that this thread exists and has such passioned responses is proof that there are people who do care about this situation, enough to possibly stop them from buying Shadow Complex.

Chair made Shadow Complex, and I'm pretty sure they want it to sell. If them making a quick public statement would help sway people, and increase the amount of copies they're going to sell, that's simply good business. Companies typically have this thing about not wanting the public to have a negative image of them; at least, the smart companies do.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

When you guys hold Obama to the same criteria as this guy, then I'll believe your outrage. When you stop voting for him, because he's campaigned and dealt a bigger blow to gay marriage than OSC could ever dream of doing, then let's talk. Until then, it's a one way street, where you forgive Obama for crushing gay marriage under his foot, and hold some guy I hadn't even heard of before this stupid controversy up to a higher standard than the president of the united states (which, you know, really does affect policy).

I know, I know, the hypocrisy should be ignored because of some difference that us lay people in internet land fail to understand. It's video games, serious business, over the president, which is not serious business. We shouldn't believe Obama, even though he says gay marriage is wrong, he really means something else, we shouldn't believe his words, instead we should "hope" he'll do the right thing in the future and actively campaign to legalize gay marriage.

k

Let's take this down by criteria.

1. Does Obama sit on the board for the national organization for marriage?
No.

2. Did Obama put his money, time, and effort in to campaigning for Prop 8?
No.

3. Did Obama pen articles relating homosexuals to child abusers, generalize they were rape victims likely to turn that over on to victims of their own, and insist that churches excommunicate anyone who appears to be gay?
Yes.

Wait, I mean no.


Strange, I thought they were exactly the same! I mean, obviously people can't be disgusted with Card and not also be disgusted with Obama, because that would be pure hypocrisy.

By the same token, we can't be disgusted by the Klan's belief in white superiority without thinking George Washington was a lousy leader and Thomas Jefferson was wrong about everything. So, really, if you want to believe in other things about the founding fathers without condoning white superiority, you have to either completely condemn them as all around awful people or admit the Klan is doing good.

 

[Coins]

Maybe if you had read, you would have seen that he was making a distinction between an author whose views are not widely known, and people who certainly do have political power, such as the president.

The President has said let the states decide. If Mr. Obama had the same views as OSC then Obama would aggressively pursue a SSM ban amendment. I dont believe Obama has ever said gays are wrong, a mistake, etc. as OSC has.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

Shadow Complex is awesome guys. You are missing out.

But I guess sitting on a video game forum talking about this is much more fun.

This thread has lasted me longer than the game would.

And oddly my computer didn't die downloading the page!