Prepare...
Moderators: adeyke, VampD3, eriqchang, Angelus3K
Re: Prepare...
I just think that vile, obscene trash should be called out for being the vile, obscene trash that it is. It isn't censorship to condemn something in moral terms. I don't think people should be hesitant (out of fear of being called in favor of censorship) to strongly criticize in moral terms something they find morally reprehensible. Not all so-called creative work is of equal value, artistic or otherwise. I'm not referring to any specific games, and I don't even think I've played most of the ones you mentioned. A few movies I have read about come to mind; one was some lousy, extremely violent, sexually exploitative, sadistic beyond belief, demeaning... some obscure indie flick... and there was apparently no hesitancy on the part of many critics (very "progressive" ones, not ones that might match some people's ideas of a Sarah Palin caricature) to denounce the movie in moral terms. Sometimes you just gotta say, "this is trash." When I say that I think certain things need to be called out, I'm not just talking about kinds of violence, but also works that advocate certain ideologies, etc. As far as ban-worthy, yeah, some things are definitely ban-worthy, and I think there is near-universal agreement on much of it. But when I'm talking about calling out trash, I'm not necessarily talking about banning stuff. I don't like it when people are afraid to make clear moral judgements about something... when they should know better.
-
- Defense Minister Status
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:22 pm
- Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Prepare...
Well...you took this down roads I wasn't expecting, but that's cool. You make some interesting points, not all of which I think fully pertain to what we were talking about, but hey, that's how conversations go right?
I don't think anyone was saying that "It isn't censorship to condemn ...something they find morally reprehensible." (sorry to shorten your quotes, just saving space), Which is very true. It is actually censorship to ban something on moral terms or prevent the release of something on moral grounds, but to just speak out against it, nope. In fact your ability to speak out against it and their ability to say it in the first place are what freedom of speech is all about. I agree whole heartily!
And with "Not all so-called creative work is of equal value, artistic or otherwise." I also agree, and also don't think anyone was saying that, but it is a good point nonetheless. There are some truly wretched pieces of 'art' out there, but as with even the worst B-Movies, fan fictions and strange modern art, there are people out there who fund and enjoy them. Art is like beauty, in that it's all in the eye of the beholder. A few good examples of this include one of my favorite movies of all time, which is actually on the top 10 list of biggest box office bombs, or my love affair with a video game that is labeled as 'overhyped' and was critically panned but I fell in love with even it's flaws. These examples may not have much merit to others, but I like what I like and someone else obviously agrees with me enough that these things get made. I would never shut someone up for not liking them, that's their right and at the same time I would never make them play it and in return I would hope they would never stop me from saying I like it or playing it myself.
I have to admit, I love when you use statements like "I think there is near-universal agreement on much of it." I'm not being sarcastic. When I first read those, they make me stop and think, and I like when things do that. My automatic response is 'Well I don't agree!" And then in my mind, I have to justify why. It actually help me figure out my own stance on things.
I find censorship a very intriguing subject. A lot of people think certain things should be censored but nobody ever wants to be censored themselves. And in the U.S you get the added bonus of throwing 'freedom of speech' into the whole mix. We have to remember that just because our way of life or way of thinking works for us, doesn't mean it will work for others in other situations. Censorship for one means censorship for all. An example: Creationist think evolution in school is detrimental, scientific minded folks think creationism is detrimental in schools. The result? In some schools you can't teach either. You learn nothing, which is not the same as letting someone make up their own mind about things. With ignorance, nothing progresses.
Lets say you're making a game that show Nazi's from a sympathetic view (which is a bit unrealistic anyway,seeing as you'd have to fund someone to fun such a project, not to mention any studios that would want their names attached to such a thing), and it actually gets made. Odds are most people wont even try it, most who do will throw it down and say it's stupid, critics will call it out on it's content and those that do enjoy it probably didn't have their minds changed by it, but already thought that way. Anyone whose mind is changed by it most likely would have done the same thing if they'd watched a Nazi Documentary and saw their well made uniforms. They'll probably get put in their place soon enough (as I had to do with one of my friends in Junior high after she watched a nazi sympathetic movie) and be on to the next thing their easily moldable minds get a hold of, but you have to give people enough credit to judge what they see (or play) for themselves so that they can think for themselves. By shutting things down you're shutting down critical thinking and encouraging mindless herd behavior, which leaves them even more susceptible to being led by bad influences.
Which leads back to the first example, anyone whose worried about losing their religious or scientific beliefs after one science class didn't have much conviction in the first place. Anyone worried about turning into nazi sympathizers after playing a game doesn't have much faith in themselves. Worried about someone else? Well kids aren't going to understand the politics behind it (I never did with any of the things I saw as a kid. It took me well into my teens to rewatch and finally Understand thet bedknobs and Broomsticks took place during world war 2), teenagers would most likely research it and for their own opinions from there and adults should hopefully look at these things critically. Anyone who picks up a controller and virtually steals a car and goes outside and shoots a cop was on the verge or terribly unbalanced as it is. Odds are if they'd turned on news and saw the same thing, they would have emulated that instead.
So why should certain things in games be censored or banned?
Obviously I don't believe they should. If you come across something blatantly disagreeable in a game (as I have in the past) then shut the game off, give it bad reviews online and return it to the store, but to censor or ban something because you personally find it disagreeable, in this world made up of radically different people, seems quite childish.
Almost done, I promise!
I'd like to make one more statement:
The world in which these moral outrageous take place are virtual. Choices made in the game do not reflect on the person in reality. They're made so that we can do things that we can't in real life, like fly, shoot zombies or roll houses into balls to be shot into the sky and turned into stars. Real morality doesn't play into it.
I can't see anyone in the entire world playing Grand Theft Auto running over a civilian and loosing sleep over it, but in real life if you hit a pedestrian you'd be shaken, scared and probably crying (And probably drive them to a hospital if you're a good person but I don't want to talk about it
)
These things don't translate from one reality to another, because they're not real, there are no real sacrifices, emotional or moral consequences to your actions, and there shouldn't be. Games are meant to be, above all else, fun. If I had to sit through a game making all the choices that I would really make, well it would be so boring I'd probably have my in game character playing a game to relieve the boredom.
TO SUM IT ALL UP:
Games = Fun
Censorship = Ignorance
Virtual Reality =/= Real Morality
(In my opinion)
Man, sorry I wrote all that guys. Blame the fact that I'm trapped in the apartment all day or what. I invite pbpb33 back to the debating thread if he'd like to continue a discussion on censorship. If not I completely understand, I did not mean for this post to turn into this.
I don't think anyone was saying that "It isn't censorship to condemn ...something they find morally reprehensible." (sorry to shorten your quotes, just saving space), Which is very true. It is actually censorship to ban something on moral terms or prevent the release of something on moral grounds, but to just speak out against it, nope. In fact your ability to speak out against it and their ability to say it in the first place are what freedom of speech is all about. I agree whole heartily!
![Happy :D](./images/smilies/happy.gif)
And with "Not all so-called creative work is of equal value, artistic or otherwise." I also agree, and also don't think anyone was saying that, but it is a good point nonetheless. There are some truly wretched pieces of 'art' out there, but as with even the worst B-Movies, fan fictions and strange modern art, there are people out there who fund and enjoy them. Art is like beauty, in that it's all in the eye of the beholder. A few good examples of this include one of my favorite movies of all time, which is actually on the top 10 list of biggest box office bombs, or my love affair with a video game that is labeled as 'overhyped' and was critically panned but I fell in love with even it's flaws. These examples may not have much merit to others, but I like what I like and someone else obviously agrees with me enough that these things get made. I would never shut someone up for not liking them, that's their right and at the same time I would never make them play it and in return I would hope they would never stop me from saying I like it or playing it myself.
I have to admit, I love when you use statements like "I think there is near-universal agreement on much of it." I'm not being sarcastic. When I first read those, they make me stop and think, and I like when things do that. My automatic response is 'Well I don't agree!" And then in my mind, I have to justify why. It actually help me figure out my own stance on things.
I find censorship a very intriguing subject. A lot of people think certain things should be censored but nobody ever wants to be censored themselves. And in the U.S you get the added bonus of throwing 'freedom of speech' into the whole mix. We have to remember that just because our way of life or way of thinking works for us, doesn't mean it will work for others in other situations. Censorship for one means censorship for all. An example: Creationist think evolution in school is detrimental, scientific minded folks think creationism is detrimental in schools. The result? In some schools you can't teach either. You learn nothing, which is not the same as letting someone make up their own mind about things. With ignorance, nothing progresses.
Lets say you're making a game that show Nazi's from a sympathetic view (which is a bit unrealistic anyway,seeing as you'd have to fund someone to fun such a project, not to mention any studios that would want their names attached to such a thing), and it actually gets made. Odds are most people wont even try it, most who do will throw it down and say it's stupid, critics will call it out on it's content and those that do enjoy it probably didn't have their minds changed by it, but already thought that way. Anyone whose mind is changed by it most likely would have done the same thing if they'd watched a Nazi Documentary and saw their well made uniforms. They'll probably get put in their place soon enough (as I had to do with one of my friends in Junior high after she watched a nazi sympathetic movie) and be on to the next thing their easily moldable minds get a hold of, but you have to give people enough credit to judge what they see (or play) for themselves so that they can think for themselves. By shutting things down you're shutting down critical thinking and encouraging mindless herd behavior, which leaves them even more susceptible to being led by bad influences.
Which leads back to the first example, anyone whose worried about losing their religious or scientific beliefs after one science class didn't have much conviction in the first place. Anyone worried about turning into nazi sympathizers after playing a game doesn't have much faith in themselves. Worried about someone else? Well kids aren't going to understand the politics behind it (I never did with any of the things I saw as a kid. It took me well into my teens to rewatch and finally Understand thet bedknobs and Broomsticks took place during world war 2), teenagers would most likely research it and for their own opinions from there and adults should hopefully look at these things critically. Anyone who picks up a controller and virtually steals a car and goes outside and shoots a cop was on the verge or terribly unbalanced as it is. Odds are if they'd turned on news and saw the same thing, they would have emulated that instead.
So why should certain things in games be censored or banned?
Obviously I don't believe they should. If you come across something blatantly disagreeable in a game (as I have in the past) then shut the game off, give it bad reviews online and return it to the store, but to censor or ban something because you personally find it disagreeable, in this world made up of radically different people, seems quite childish.
Almost done, I promise!
I'd like to make one more statement:
The world in which these moral outrageous take place are virtual. Choices made in the game do not reflect on the person in reality. They're made so that we can do things that we can't in real life, like fly, shoot zombies or roll houses into balls to be shot into the sky and turned into stars. Real morality doesn't play into it.
I can't see anyone in the entire world playing Grand Theft Auto running over a civilian and loosing sleep over it, but in real life if you hit a pedestrian you'd be shaken, scared and probably crying (And probably drive them to a hospital if you're a good person but I don't want to talk about it
![Mad >:](./images/smilies/mad.gif)
These things don't translate from one reality to another, because they're not real, there are no real sacrifices, emotional or moral consequences to your actions, and there shouldn't be. Games are meant to be, above all else, fun. If I had to sit through a game making all the choices that I would really make, well it would be so boring I'd probably have my in game character playing a game to relieve the boredom.
TO SUM IT ALL UP:
Games = Fun
Censorship = Ignorance
Virtual Reality =/= Real Morality
(In my opinion)
Man, sorry I wrote all that guys. Blame the fact that I'm trapped in the apartment all day or what. I invite pbpb33 back to the debating thread if he'd like to continue a discussion on censorship. If not I completely understand, I did not mean for this post to turn into this.
-
- The Prince of Shapeir
- Posts: 8887
- Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 4:12 am
- Location: Phobos
- Contact:
Re: Prepare...
I think a lot of that is subjective to personal opinion. For example, as far as I'm concerned, the only horror movies worth watching are the most gruesome, violent, and shocking ones (as long as they are well-made, and aren't merely exploitation films). Anything less just doesn't push the envelope far enough, and I'd find them boring and predictable to watch. I like some of Quentin Tarintino's movies for the same reason. If I'm going to devote the time to watching something, then it needs to be mentally stimulating. It needs to have a variety of characters with conflicting morals who play well off one another. I loved the television shows "The Sopranos" and "Six Feet Under" for this reason. Both were incredibly well-made, precisely because they dealt with morbid and taboo subject matter. This gave them a definite edge that I have seen in few other shows.I just think that vile, obscene trash should be called out for being the vile, obscene trash that it is.
As far as games go, what about being able to play as the thief in Quest for Glory? I'm sure most people would be of the opinion that breaking and entering into houses, stealing valuables, and clubbing people with a blackjack to pickpocket them is morally reprehensible. But I doubt anyone would judge a QFG player based on the fact that they played the game as a thief. A person would have to be a real dummy to confuse virtual morality with reality.
Anyone who kills/robs real-life people based on what they see in a film or game is a mentally imbalanced individual who has been that way for a while already. This kind of mentality builds up in a person over a long period, usually due to some form of abuse they've suffered in life. A game/film may become the trigger for them committing a crime (but then, anything could), though it's not the cause. Problems in society are more deeply-rooted than that, and sometimes the media and politicians just want to use games as an easy scapegoat (i.e. Blaming "Doom" for the Columbine shootings).
-
- Defense Minister Status
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:22 pm
- Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Prepare...
Well you just summed things up a heck-ova lot nicer then I did, and without writing a novel! ![Laugh :lol](./images/smilies/laugh.gif)
![Laugh :lol](./images/smilies/laugh.gif)
-
- Slacker of Shapeir
- Posts: 2418
- Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 9:11 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Prepare...
same thing I was writing about harvesting little girls in Bioshock. Back in the days of Fallout 1 and 2 they had to take all the children out of the game in the European versions (Breaking a few quests) because of the games free roam and ability to kill children if one so chooses. Fallout 3 they backed away from it by just not adding children outside the vault (as you can't kill people in the vault anyways) Of course I'm not advocating child slaying but when it comes to a handful of pixels I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want with them. It's like if I drew a picture of a tyrannosaurus shitting on a unicorn and a police officer comes over and says "Oh this is awful and disgusting, I hereby ban this drawing from the world" and sets my page on fire. Suddenly I'm the bad guy and he's not an arsonist. I'm not saying we should lift all restrictions on video games but there shouldn't be any that can be banned no matter how hard Jack Thompson tries.
-
- Defense Minister Status
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:22 pm
- Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Prepare...
Well there are a few children in fallout 3, but they don't let you kill them.
I know, I tried![Happy :D](./images/smilies/happy.gif)
I know, I tried
![Happy :D](./images/smilies/happy.gif)
Re: Prepare...
It's best in Fallout 2 where children actually aim to kill you, like that one that throws you a hand grenade instead of a pebble. ![Devil :evil](./images/smilies/devil.gif)
![Devil :evil](./images/smilies/devil.gif)
-
- Slacker of Shapeir
- Posts: 2418
- Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 9:11 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Prepare...
HOLY FUCK YOU'RE THE SCOURGE OF THE EARTH AND WHAT IS WRONG WITH GAMERS! YOU BRING SHAME TO CANADA!Lady Pyro wrote:Well there are a few children in fallout 3, but they don't let you kill them.
I know, I tried
BRB playing a nazi in an adventure game.
Re: Prepare...
Well, I had tried to avoid specific examples in my last post because it's easy for the discussion to get bogged down with them. My point was simply that boundaries are important and exist (even in "games"), not that video games will necessarily drive players to exactly recreate virtual actions in real life. Maybe the immoral examples listed above are things that most people would regard as within the acceptable boundaries for gameplay. I guess it depends on the person and the example. But what about a game that celebrates child rape and let's the player take part in every facet of the deed? They're only pixels, after all. Or a game that allows the player to be an operator of a Holocaust gas chamber? Or a "game" that promotes jihad or Nazism? Games, like all creative pursuits, reflect and influence our culture in ways that can't always be measured or immediately appreciated. I believe that, if someone finds something morally reprehensible and beyond what they consider acceptable boundaries (even if it's in "just a game"), then it is a GOOD thing to condemn it, shun it, etc. if we care about the quality of our cultural standards. That's all I was trying to say.
-
- The Prince of Shapeir
- Posts: 8887
- Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 4:12 am
- Location: Phobos
- Contact:
Re: Prepare...
Like this game called Under Siege, which is a first person shooter where you play as a Palestinian Jihadist, killing Israeli Defense Force soldiers?Or a "game" that promotes jihad or Nazism?
The game is factually and historically inaccurate, heavily biased, and something that would probably piss me off if I played it. I can't say I would enjoy it, however, I might play it for the same reason I'd read the Qu'ran or Mein Kampf -- to see the message it's preaching and determine where it's faults lie. Nevertheless, the Palestinian developers have made the game the way they intended and now it's there for the rest of the world to see. Jihadists might enjoy playing that game as an alternative to American-made First Person Shooters. I wouldn't, but at the same time I wouldn't seek to ban it or censor it either. I see the motive behind making this game as another reason which I can use as evidence of why Islam is the way it is and why Muslims act the way they do. Why ban something that can be used as evidence against the ideology?
However, if I did play the game, just because I shot a virtual Israeli solder, it's not going to affect my life or make me sympathetic to the Palestinian cause after I turn the game off.
Basically, you can say or create whatever you want (free speech). But then you also have to be responsible for it and accept any repercussions.
-
- Defense Minister Status
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:22 pm
- Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Prepare...
Quest for Glory Fan: Shhh! People aren't supposed to know! I was actually sent to Canada to purposely destroy it from the inside out with my lack of video game ethics.
bpb33: It's just like AGC said, you can make a game about anything you want. Do your example sound appealing to me? Nope, so I wouldn't play them, but I'm not going to stop them from being made either because who cares? No one will ever force someone else to play it or enjoy it, so a game company wastes their time and money and we all move on.
bpb33: It's just like AGC said, you can make a game about anything you want. Do your example sound appealing to me? Nope, so I wouldn't play them, but I'm not going to stop them from being made either because who cares? No one will ever force someone else to play it or enjoy it, so a game company wastes their time and money and we all move on.
Re: Prepare...
While I agree with this point, I would like to point out that the underscored part in your quote doesn't have to be true. For example, in Spain we publicly fund a lot of movies, plays and games that due to their content (violence, pornography, political agenda) most people wouldn't pay for. In fact, most people actually don't pay for them, they are office bombs in the most traumatic sense. However, because the authors recover all the money spent in the form of government subsidies (and even make a profit), they don't care that there is no market for their bullshit. They keep doing the same offensive products for the sake of being offensive year after year, and they keep getting money for 'art' that nobody wants. In that case, I would heartily support "banning" those products, in the sense that products that the vast majority of the population deems offensive should be barred from getting funding from the state.Lady Pyro wrote:bpb33: It's just like AGC said, you can make a game about anything you want. Do your example sound appealing to me? Nope, so I wouldn't play them, but I'm not going to stop them from being made either because who cares? No one will ever force someone else to play it or enjoy it, so a game company wastes their time and money and we all move on.
- Spikey
- Insomniac Speed Demon
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 10:23 pm
- Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: Prepare...
Am I in the politcally incorrect thread or what?
So. Yeah. Definately a KQ3 spin off, yeah. At least, I hope so.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/wink.gif)
So. Yeah. Definately a KQ3 spin off, yeah. At least, I hope so.
-
- The Prince of Shapeir
- Posts: 8887
- Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 4:12 am
- Location: Phobos
- Contact:
Re: Prepare...
I'm just glad that the Australian government is finally considering an R-classification for games.
To date, the highest games classification rating we've had is an age recommendation of 15+. Anything not suitable for 15-year-olds gets modified (content either changed or removed), or banned outright.
Even Sierra's Phantasmagoria was banned here just a few weeks after it's release in 1995. I managed to buy a copy before they pulled it from store shelves. I also had to order the uncensored version of Duke Nukem 3D directly from the US in 1996. An R-rating has been a long time coming. Hopefully the government won't renege on it...
![Happy :D](./images/smilies/happy.gif)
Even Sierra's Phantasmagoria was banned here just a few weeks after it's release in 1995. I managed to buy a copy before they pulled it from store shelves. I also had to order the uncensored version of Duke Nukem 3D directly from the US in 1996. An R-rating has been a long time coming. Hopefully the government won't renege on it...
-
- Defense Minister Status
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:22 pm
- Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Prepare...
pbpb33 wrote: I'm not sure why you jumped to "stopping them from being made" (by which I assume you mean a criminal ban on the possession or creation of objectionable material). Although there is material that obviously merits criminal banning, that isn't even what I've been talking about.
pbpb33 wrote:As far as ban-worthy, yeah, some things are definitely ban-worthy, and I think there is near-universal agreement on much of it.
dictionary.com wrote: BAN /bæn/ banned, ban·ning: the act of prohibiting by law; interdiction.
pbpb33 wrote: I'm talking about condemning material that deserves condemnation, such as the hypothetical pro-Al Qaeda, pro-Nazi, simulated child rape, etc. material I mentioned.
pbpb33 wrote: Hopefully people reading here keep in mind that a main point is to show support for freedom of expression, even expression of very offensive things, which is being threatened by terrorism and vendettas that seek to snuff out anything that dares to offend certain groups.
pbpb33 wrote:I'm glad to hear that you "don't find them appealing," but is that the most you can muster?
The Lady Pyro wrote: The world in which these moral outrageous take place are virtual. Choices made in the game do not reflect on the person in reality. They're made so that we can do things that we can't in real life, like fly, shoot zombies or roll houses into balls to be shot into the sky and turned into stars. Real morality doesn't play into it.
pbpb33 wrote: I'm not trying to pick on you personally, by the way... just trying to make a point.I'm not saying we should go on some criminal banning spree or necessarily tell people what they can or cannot play or watch, but just because something is not officially banned by the state does not mean that we should be silent in our judgement of its worth. I feel like we risk becoming morally impotent if we always shy away from seeming judgmental.
I only have this to add:The Lady Pyro wrote: In fact your ability to speak out against it and their ability to say it in the first place are what freedom of speech is all about. I agree whole heartily!
This was not about my personal feelings, I shouldn't have to state that I find pro-nazi sentiments or pedophilia repulsive, but I'll try not to take that personally.
Re: Prepare...
Wow, you posted the reply after I deleted my post. After reading through all the previous posts (I had missed a bunch), I figured the subject had been beaten to death already, and didn't want to keep it going... so I just deleted my somewhat redundant post a minute or so after posting it... but apparently not before you got to it! Anyway, regarding what I said about some things being ban-worthy, that wasn't referring to the video game examples mentioned... I just didn't think it was worth getting into specifics that I'm sure we all can agree on. Lastly, thank you for (I thinkThis was not about my personal feelings, I shouldn't have to state that I find pro-nazi sentiments or pedophilia repulsive, but I'll try not to take that personally.pbpb33 wrote:As far as ban-worthy, yeah, some things are definitely ban-worthy, and I think there is near-universal agreement on much of it.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/wink.gif)
Re: Prepare...
Seems like the thread is hi-jacked. Any additional hints on the new game?
-
- Royal Vizier Status
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 3:37 am
- Location: Central New York
- Contact:
Re: Prepare...
Wait, this is about a new game? Cool. I need a new one to play.
Bt
Bt
-
- The Master of All Things Musical
- Posts: 4030
- Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 8:57 pm
- Location: Manitoba, Canada
Re: Prepare...
No more hints. It's too close to release now.
-
- Royal Servant Status
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:48 pm
Re: Prepare...
Wow great another game coming out it looks like late may or june could be a great time for adventure fans with 3 different fan games coming out soon. Space Quest 2 remake,Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy remake and now this mysterious project.MusicallyInspired wrote:No more hints. It's too close to release now.
![Roll :rollin](./images/smilies/roll.gif)
John
-
- Defense Minister Status
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:22 pm
- Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Prepare...
OoOo Do you have a link to the Hitchhikers one? That could be awesome!
-
- Royal Servant Status
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:48 pm
Re: Prepare...
Lady Pyro here is the link to the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy remake http://h2g2remake.wordpress.com/
That remake is suppose to come out on May 25.
John
That remake is suppose to come out on May 25.
John
-
- The Master of All Things Musical
- Posts: 4030
- Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 8:57 pm
- Location: Manitoba, Canada
Re: Prepare...
Not to mention Monkey Island 2 Special Edition...
-
- Royal Servant Status
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:48 pm
Re: Prepare...
Another adventure game to prepare to come out is (Doctor Who my favorite tv show) which wil be in 4 parts coming out in June.
and i think Heroine's Quest is coming soon.
John
and i think Heroine's Quest is coming soon.
John
-
- Defense Minister Status
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:22 pm
- Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Re: Prepare...
Pity the Hitchhikers game isn't out sooner since this is a long weekend. Which Doctor will the Doctor Who game feature? That has great potential! Also I though Heroine's Quest was canceled, I'm very pleased to hear otherwise!