True_Avery Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Spore offends 'militant atheists' http://www.gamespot.com/pages/news/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=26538237&sid=6195789&action=convert&om_clk=latestnews&tag=latestnews;title;2 In Spore, players guide the evolution of life-forms from their beginnings as protozoan organisms to sentient members of galaxy-conquering civilizations. But although the game appears to be ripe fodder for criticism from creationists, it isn't the pulpit-pounding religious zealots who are taking up arms against the game, according to game creator Will Wright. "I think our bigger fear was that we didn't want to offend any religious people," said Wright in a recent interview with Eurogamer. "But looking at the discussion that unfolded from this thing, what we had was a good, sizable group of players that we might call militant atheists, and the rest of the players seemed very tolerant, including all of the religious players." "I didn't expect to hit hot buttons on the atheist side as much; I expected it on the religious side," noted Wright. "But so far I've had no critical feedback at all from anybody who is religious feeling that we were misrepresenting religion or it was bad to represent religion in the game. It was really the atheists." In the interview, Wright emphasized that his team at EA-owned Maxis contains a number of "pretty religious" members, and that questions of faith were left as open as possible to avoid a dogmatic quagmire. "Obviously as the player you're coming in and playing something like a god, directing the evolution of a species, but we never really state who you the player are." Already available for mobile phones, Spore is expected to ship for the PC, Mac, and DS on September 7 in North America. A Wii version is also in development and will launch at an as-yet-undetermined date. GameSpot's extensive coverage has more on Spore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW01 Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 They must be joking. It has to be the most contrived argument I have ever come across, that there are insinuations of divine guidance because the player evolves the various...things. Would they prefer that you just sit and watch as the game plays out in front of you? No, no - I suppose then you would just be a god that doesn't interfere. Seems everyone has an axe to grind with at least one game out there. If they are offended by it, I have this to say to them: DON'T BUY IT! IT'S JUST A GAME! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nedak Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 It's just a game. People need to get over it and do some self-reflection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderWiggin Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Wwwow. That's absurd. _EW_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Why weren't they such major douchebags when SimCity came out? Pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigundr Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Why weren't they such major douchebags when SimCity came out? Pathetic. Exactly! If they wanted to throw up a fuss about playing God, then SimCity was the perfect opportunity. It seems that these militant atheists have no idea what they believe. (Directed towards the people we're bashing.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Wait, seriously? Atheists getting annoyed about a game that depicts what could potentially be the Divine? Look, if you're going to get annoyed about that, there's a huge list of other games. We'll start with the Baldur's Gate series, where you play the child of a God, work our way up to the Black and White series, where you are explicitly playing a God, and then drink several bottles of Maddog 20/20 in an attempt to figure out when people became so idiotic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 It's a game... People are to wound up in this day and age. Once again: it's a game. Deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcesious Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 It's funny actually... if you visit the spore forums, there's a lot of ridiculous debate over this... Although I don't see any militant athisem or militant thiesm on the forums. Just a few debates, and a scarce amount of morons who instantly get pwned with logic by someone else when they rant about it. The situation is quite under control, and it isn't that big of a problem... I have one thing to say to militant athiests (Not directed to anyone ont his forum): What's so bad about playing as a God? And one thing to say to militant thiests (Again, not directed to anyone on this forum): What's so bad about the way life works? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Meh. Still hilariously pathetic, like Li'l Brudder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnseyy Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Wait, athiests get offended if someone says god exists? I thought it was religious people who got offended if someone said god didn't exist... This is almost as bad as people saying Harry Potter promotes paganism. :¬: people need to get a life and realise that it's only entertainment - it's not a way to instil opinions upon people. Honestly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcesious Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 ^ | | Don't make me rant about tolerance and intolerance both of the religious and unreligious people have for justifiable reasons on both sides... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Tolerance is a pointless prospect, because no matter how tolerant you are, you're still intolerant of something. Better to be openly intolerant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mur'phon Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Disagreed, tolerance can make things go smoother, if you want people to do what you want, proclaiming they'll burn in hell/are delusional isn't really smart. Besides, what do you gain by being intolerant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Rider Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Exactly! If they wanted to throw up a fuss about playing God, then SimCity was the perfect opportunity. It seems that these militant atheists have no idea what they believe. (Directed towards the people we're bashing.) To be technically correct, we're not creating life in Sim City, life already exists and just moves in to our area, we're like, a big contractor or something. Yes, there's a "god mode" to build the world, but I think actually calling it a "god mode" adds humor to it. Anyway, I think any argument about Spore from pretty much anyone relating to the playing God or insinuating that there is a God is utterly stupid. Just assume you're an ultra-advanced race that wants to screw with some life on some distant world. It's a game, people really need to lighten up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astor Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Just assume you're an ultra-advanced race that wants to screw with some life on some distant world. It's a game, people really need to lighten up. Or, to take your example further, we could just assume that we're just playing a game that allows you create aliens. But that just seems to be too simple a concept to grasp for some people. EDIT: 666 post... creepy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Ah, but there's no such thing as total tolerance, Mur'phon. A lot of allegedly tolerant people are very intolerant of anyone who isn't as tolerant as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 Ah, but there's no such thing as total tolerance, Mur'phon. A lot of allegedly tolerant people are very intolerant of anyone who isn't as tolerant as they are. Which proves that they are intolerant. In some respects, I agree: it's near (or is) impossible to be completely something. In this case, tolerant. However, we can strive towards being more accepting than we are now, thereby treating allotting greater respect to all of us. After all, which one is better, and does us more respect? Being intolerant, and incapable of understanding each other, or being tolerant, and, by understanding each other, a better person/race? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcesious Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 Okay, I'll make a mini-rant... Tolerance and Intolerance... The'yre the same thing. Not truly opposites really... Tolerance is usually concealed or controlled intolerance, or visa versa... Why is intolerance justified? Because of what people do in the name of their beleifs and agendas. I'm talking to people of all beleifs here... Athiesm has had it's problems, and so has religion. We've both had a good deal of faults in the actiosn of the followers of both our beleifs. What the beleifs themselves infulence people to do makes 'intolerance' of beleifs justifiable... Every beleif has potential to create danger or harm, no matter what that beleif is... After all: "Never underestimate the ability of large groups of stupid people to completely ruin everything'. Why do we fight over these things with varying degrees of intolerance and tolerance? Because we from both sides see things fromt he other side as harmful... Oh I'll just copy and paste this thingy i amde awhile ago: What I've found, thinking about all of the problems of humanity, is that everyone is attached to a core prejudice and bias, even me, branching off into beliefs based on what they know and have experienced/ learned. To formulate the perfect offense/defense, you must know your 'enemy', that's a given; but you must also know yourself. So I've been thinking about why I and other people of all the numerous sides of 'belief' believe what we do and do what we do. The thing I've 'discovered' is that the true human condition is one in which we try to make others understand. The core prejudice of us all is that we want to make everyone believe what we do, because it makes sense to us. The drive to do this is that others have this same prejudice, but under a different belief/logic system of mind. We all want everyone to understand why we believe what we do and do what we do. So, we all argue to prove what makes the most sense, based on what we 'know' and what we've experienced. We all want others to be like ourselves, to have the comfort of perfectly equal ideals and beliefs. The human condition is a suffering of misunderstanding. We all want everyone to agree and understand us, as also, as a secondary prejudice not everyone has, we want to save others from 'beliefs' and 'logic systems' we have been led/concluded to believe are wrong, and let them become part of the 'understanding' and comfort of having no disagreements. The problem is, subconsciously, we all have an insatiable drive to get what we want, and we have wishful thinking/we devise a counter argument when our beliefs are 'threatened'. So, in argument, I am trying t understand exactly what it is like for a person to try to fight an argument against something he/she believes as true. To have everything you know, and the highest extent of what you can understand threatened- it creates a feeling of vulnerability in all of us, a vulnerability that often temporarily destroys open-mindedness before an argument begins. The solution- we must focus on being open-minded. I highly agree with Voltaire- 'Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the right to do so.' That's what would make everyone happy- if we all had a universal rule to let others think what they want, and not challenge what they think. But sadly, it just doesn't work that way- something has to be (Or needs to be) ultimately and irrefutably true- because as a species, we want to survive; and for many, many millennia, we've been trying to figure out exactly what the perfect way to do that is. It's a noble cause- to want to live, to advance, and to preserve the existence of others of our kind, but that cause might just be too far-fetched to accomplish, what with the state of disagreement and disorder we're all in. The biggest subconscious prejudice is that we also thrive on disagreement. Problem is, we all want agreement, but, as has been said before by several famous people- "To much agreement ruins an argument." (Edit: IE, a boring utopia or a world without any disagreement to contemplate could drive some people insane and leave them feeling without a purpose to improve anything in the world) Without something to strive for, without a 'crutch' for ourselves to attempt to recover from, but never truly try to recover from, we would all feel as if we had no purpose. For the human mind- my mind included, whilst still making this argument- we need a purpose, a conflict within us, in order to truly 'live'. To live, one must have the capacity for disagreement and agreement. Chaos and Order. Apart, neither has any true purpose. That's why I must do what I will. That's why you, and everyone else, must do what you do. Because you 'must', or else you will have nothing to live for. To both control and rebel. To create and destroy. Break old boundaries, and strive to break new ones. That's what it means to live. If anything; I think it's important to agree to disagree. ----------------------- As it turns out, that is in no way anything close to a mini-rant, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 You know, that can be summed up in one line. "Everyone is different, and that's good." The bigger problem is that the world has gotten the word 'Tolerance' confused with 'Acceptance'. Along with a lot of other words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Devon Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 That article was ridiculously unspecific. It doesn't even mention what the 'militant atheists' were offended by, or even provide anything that verifies someone was offended in the first place. That article was so vague I can't believe anyone is actually taking it seriously. I wouldn't put it past some people to get offended over content in a game (atheist or religious), and I think it's a stupid thing to get upset over, but the other side was represented so poorly here I think it's premature to condemn them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 Hm. I admit, Devon has a point. The article was startlingly vague, without so much as a quote from one of the Atheist Militia. Still, I was fully expecting a bunch of Ultra-Sensitive Christians to start whining, so I'm thanking the Lord - I hate it when my side makes an ass of itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
True_Avery Posted August 14, 2008 Author Share Posted August 14, 2008 http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=211273 http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=211296 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Devon Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 Neither of those articles says what atheists are offended at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 Just because you're tolerant doesn't mean you can't correct people who are incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.