|
|
Rule of Rose - the sickest game ever?
Author: Ryan GarsidePublished: 17th November 2006
The graphics in Rule of the Rose will look dated.
The game is set for a November 24th release in Britain and has already had the Mayor of Rome calling for it to be banned. It currently has a 16+ rating but Justice Commissioner of the EU, Franco Frattini, had this to say:
“It is first and foremost the responsibility of the parents to protect children from such games, but I nevertheless think that we at member state and European level also have to take responsibility to protect children’s rights. These types of games are dreadful examples for our children.”
We haven't had a chance to get our hands on the game at the Bit-Tech office but the storyline does sound pretty grim. You play the role of a young girl who lives in an orphanage in 1930's Britain. You encounter a group of children known as the Red Crayon Aristocrats who perform sadistic acts on both adults and other children. Your job, as with most games, is to stop them.
Sony did not release the game in the US for fear of a massive backlash to the scenes of sadomasochism and lesbianism but the game is being released across Europe by smaller independent companies. The game will features scenes of kidnap and torture, with the main character involved in scenes where she is buried alive, gagged, doused in liquids and thrown in a rather sinister sounding 'Filth Room'. Makes Canis Canem Edit look like fun for all the family doesn't it?
Will you be playing Rule of Rose or are there certain lines games should never cross? Let us know in the forums.
Recent articles on bit-tech.net
Comments (47)Stats: 0.069 seconds
While I probably wouldn't play it myself, I respect the right for it to be made, just give it the appropriate rating.
Aggies
Oh come on, if I can enjoy watching the "SAW" movies where people get their jaws wrenched apart I should logically be able to move my penchent for funny torture over to video games also
watch some french horror movies much much worse then saw make saw look like the telletubies as in all hollywood films they don't actually show anything happening but in other movies you can see there arm being cut off and head being sliced up :)
And frankly, the last thin we need in Europe right now is a local Jack Thomson or a wave of puritanism/idiocy making it's way to the EU Commission.
Is the game suitable for children? Probably not...slap a +18 or whatever sticker on it, and let the parents decide what's best for their children. All this false-moralism and patronicing makes me sick. As much as parents that don't have a clue about what their children do and then put the blame on everything except themselves when said children does something wrong.
i'm not supporting that these games should be banned, but the age restriction doesnt always work, my parents bought me Resi Evil, silent hill and other 18 titles when i was about 12, manhunt at 16, etc. Parents will buy their kids games despite the age warning because they trust their kids will see it as just a game.
People who have a say on whether or not video game titles should be banned, know that people well under the age certificate will play it, and they have to take this into account. If a game so truely horriffic existed that could turn all unsuspecting children into insanely gruesome murderous sado-rapist child molesters (a la 8mm) later in life, then they will ban it. Germany, New Zealand, and Austalia banned Manhunt for such reasons.
This sounds more brutal than Silent Hill (the game) which I hold to be a pretty damn violent series. The fact that Sony decided not to release the game in the USA tells me even they think the game is too intense. I mean Rockstar knows controversy, but I honestly feel that this is different.
... Actually this reminds me of the old game Alice blended with Silent Hill/Resident Evil. The story would make a good Stephen King book and/or movie. Which makes you all the sudden realize: I don't remember the last time a movie caught flack on the grounds of violence or corrupting youth.
(Wonder what would happen if there was a GTA Movie? )
[PS - Parents could learn to educate themselves and raise their kids intelligently. Movies have ratings just like games. And there's a reason. And in this case maybe this is one of those rare times a game should be AO. After all with the Gen-X group having grown up with games and now most of them are in their 20's, there are eventually going to be games catered towards them. Games with dark plots, very graphic themes, and other things along that line. Bioshock is another title along those lines where you have to kill children to stop monsters in an underwater city. I think this is fine. If politicians weren't ignorant about video games and parents took responsibility, everything would be fine. But then again, that's exactly why it never is and there are always these problems coming up in the first place.]
i usually play any *controversial* games becoz theyre usually out of the ordinary, interesting, unique, and actually fun.... i love blood and gore (damn u bf2142 for not having blood) in games such as Doom or FEAR, i love being able to hijack anybody's car and run from the police in GTA series (and coffee mod...), and i really want to try playing bullies... that sounds like fun!
but
there are lines that games shouldnt cross. period.
id probably try this game out coz i wanna know how it plays, but im not sure if i'll like it... BUT the idea of an 5-13yr old can simply ask their retarded parents to buy this game...... disgust me.
yes, of course, lotsa movies are far far FAR worse........ but look at the access and incentive of it...
- u will get (well, at least MORE) strict patrolling on movie theatres than ur local ebgames or walmart; in terms of age limits.
- there's not much incentive/push for kids to download SAWIII becoz if they "kinda" dont like blood and gore that much, they simply wont try to watch them. Now imagine they make a GAME of the movie with the same blood and gore... where u can play a character and accomplish objectives interactively? For the younger generation THIS is more interesting/entertaining, thus grants them the effort to actually acquire and play it, more so than watching the movie..... Come on, kids love to play games more than adults... in a very very subjective point of view :)
these 2 points implies to the fact that; most kids that may not have interest in watching a *movie* about orphanage abuse where they're not even legal to see, will have more interest in a *game* on the same topic where they have easier access and it actually grants them more entertainment value.
thats where the problem lies, IMO.
im not worried that my 5yr old niece will want to see SAW3 on DVD, but i am worried if she ask her mom to get her a new playstation game and all the kids in school is talking about this Rule of Roses thingie and her mom, my sister, which has 0 knowledge in video games, will buy it for her. given the old joe that works in walmart or EB doesnt warn her when she buys it........
get my point?
just my 2c.
But here is where the very problem lies its the PARENTS responsibility for checking content. Hell just reading the back will do it for most games. I agree with fines for selling inapropiate games to minors but having a federal body for it isnt such a good idea. Hell do what they do with porn mags in the UK stick em on the top shelf so the nippers cant get at em. So short of kids running into EBgames with stepladders (walmart has them in glass cases but actually do check id ive been ID'd twice and im 23 ffs) an adult has to directly place it in a kids hands. Then you can do em for adding to the deliquiency of a minor (think they have that law over here to) and problem solved. We dont need new laws or new ratings or new bans we need the ones we have enforced.
To enforce them like you say would require the law to monitor the childs usage of the product, and the problem with this ever taking off would be a breach of privacy etc. Even when caught allowing your child to play an 18 restricted game, courts wouldnt take the issue seriously, maximum penalty will probably be a really small fine and promising never to let the child play that game again.
Doom was rather brutal back in its day, my dad used to play final doom on the playstation, and he let me play it as often as i wanted, and what do you do? you run around with a selection of weapons killing monsters, you attack them with chainsaws and rocket launchers, and when the monsters exploded into pixelated piles of blood and bones, the doom guy would have his evil grin. Any parent in the perfect world would never allow such a thing. But how many of you played doom? and how many of you would let your 8 yo play it? I bet most of you wouldnt even care, i know i wouldn't.
Point is, banning games that cross the line into seriously depraved is sometimes the only way to be sure children don't get influenced in the learning stages of their mentality and morality into what is acceptable behaviour, and what isn't. Parents should restrict their children. But they don't. So more has to be done to ensure such games never get into childrens hands.
If I understand correctly, you play the good guy and your goal is to stop the bad guy. and the problem is? I want my kids to learn to stand up for whats right and fight evil. Have any of these people ever read the real grimm fairy tales? Not too many years ago, a certain amount of gruesomeness was considered perfectly acceptable when teaching children important life lessons such as good vs evil.
Thats the problem with kids these days, they are shielded from everything even slightly negative and aren't taught the skills to deal with the bad things the real world has to offer. Then when something terrible happens later on, like say they order a mocha latte and instead get a cappachino, they don't know how to deal with it and need valium to cope with the stress; or they get wasted on chemicals they got from some guy in an alley; or they buy an ak47 and shoot up a school full of ten year olds.
It's very similar to the Simpson's -- when that show first came out, many parents were mad about it. Why? Because "it's a cartoon...it's for children...but it's got adult themes and talk of "eating of one's shorts"....good heavens, my 4 year old was traumatized!!!!"
The problem is two-fold:
1) grown-ups who've forgotten how to have fun, or think fun isn't for grownups, think the only person who'd play a video game or watch a cartoon should be under 10. So they judge the material with the mindset of "if I was an innocent little sheltered 10 year old who was overprotected and had never seen the real world or heard others cussing at school, would my mommy want me to see this?" Of course you're going to think the game should be banned with that mindset.
2) it's a genre that some people assume is designed for children, so some people freely let their children have access to it...only to be shocked later by the content. So really, it's a problem with when the judging of the cartoon or game occurs in some households, and how the parents of those households need to be re-trained. The judging of a game should come at purchase time, with an educated inspection of the packaging and an understanding of game ratings....it shouldn't come 2 weeks later when you walk into your kids room and he's already played the game for 28 hours and you're totally shocked by the content and can't believe it "got into your house."
I agree with all of your points...but this one is too politically open-ended. It's true, many parents are lazy with the parenting (or, hard working with the jobbing and don't have time for the parenting...whatever). So somebody needs to protect the children. But if a good portion of the population screams that, and politicians hear it, that's when the world suddenly gets really boring for the rest of us. Especially since there'll always be some people with an even more extreme view of what qualifies as depraved enough that it should be eliminated. Maybe any and all pornography should be eliminated? (including the internet, magazines, and movies). I was about 12 when I say the first porno of a friend's dad. I know a hell of a lot of parents would flip out about that. I was watching Jason, Freddy, Halloween, and Texas Chainsaw movies at about the same time at a friend's house. Tons of parents would flip about that.
For crying out loud, I'd be willing to bet that 40% of mothers in the US would declare the site of a womans boob damaging to "children" up to at least 15 years of age. There are so many cases over here of women being (illegally) harassed while breastfeeding, it's just ridiculous. Never underestimate how low people can push the bar of what is and isn't decent.
There is no way to make sure children "never" see something other than by eliminating it from society altogether. And squelching any underground movement to produce it. So, if we all take the attitude of " if it's always bad for kids, it should be banned for everybody" we're all going to end up living in a disney movie with only disney movies to choose from for entertainment.
As far as I'm concerned, the only things that should be "banned" are the things that harm somebody during their production (you know, like snuff films, kiddie porn, etc). And those things already are banned. Start banning things that might harm somebody who is viewing it, and it's a downhill ride into the world that the uber-religious minority wants us to live in.
this is my logic.
as for adults playing games, i will only stop playing games when i:
A) am dead
B) become paralyzed or invalid
C) become so old that i cant move
and for sterilizing the environment for our children.... i don't approve, if children don't have a notion of what is the real world when they are young then when they discover the real world for them selfs they may do really bad stuff or it may even overwhelm them, children should and must be protected, but not like this.
there are cases of kids calling teachers pedophiles and that teachers harassed their students and the next thing you know the teacher is out of the job and the teacher did nothing he was blamed for, the teacher was framed.
If children are well educated and shown RIGHT and WRONG then they wont kill people even if they play this game. Its all a psicological matter already from what surrounds them.
ps... hi people, im Proxess :)
There's no line that games can cross, ever (except for say, interactive rape or something like that), because they're an expression. There are some games that should have never even have been made because of how bad they are in general. ex Poor concept, Poor Reasons for releasing a game on a touchy subject (Well rockstar released bully, let's release something even worse but apply some sony magic to it to **** it up, all for a couple bucks, since everything else we make is complete garbage!), etc.
-ed out
Anyway just a thought
EA is putting its logo on the wrapper.... why not put something like "WARNING THIS GAME IS RATED MATURE AND WILL PERMANENTLY DAMAGE YOUR CHILDREN LIFE AND MAKE YOU STERILE!!!!!!!!!"
Probably true, but then the fact that you read bit-tech shows that you are a decent and intelligent person :D
Anyway if you only sold the games online you could have a page show up, before accepting the transaction saying "This game is seriously violent and according to to Jack Thomson it will turn your kids into crazy serial killers" or maybe just that is contained violence and lots of blood and that it is rated for 18+ or what ever. I think that people are soo use to products having so many stickers slapped on them that they don't take notice anymore, when was the last time you actually looked at all the hipe on the packaging of what ever piece of hardware/game/software you bought? (man I wish I had a link to the movie made of how MS would package an Ipod, just to prove my point)
NO, lets NOT let the parents decide whats best for their children, we've done that thus far and look at whats happened . . .
If the game is going to land in the lap of a minor, nomatter who buys it, it shouldn't be bought in the first place.
IMHO
-ed out
Silent Hill didn't have explicit lesbianism (nor implicit...who cares, it didn't have any kind of lesbianism at all...pity). That's a ++ for Rule of Roes in my book. And when I was 14, it would have been a ++++++++++++++++++++++++++.
Joking aside, what's saddening it's just that 99% of this polemic is due to RoR having some kid of hint of smell of implicit sexuality among... *gasp*... teenagers.
And we all do know that 13, 14 or 15 years old are, of course, asexual beings with no interest whatsoever in sex, no sexual drive and no hordes of hormones rampaging their pure tiny bodies. The mere mention of sexuality among teenagers or a game involving teens (or early teens) taints the mind and the body of any sane person, doesn't it?
Silent Hill or Resident Evil were as violent, gore and disturbing as RoR seems to be. Why wasn't no outcry and no polemics then? Because they didn't had any sexual themes at all. I'm sorry to say this, but there is a big problem with SEX in the USA. Many people there seem to have their morals backwards when it comes to sex and violence. This time it hasn't got to GTA + Hot Coffee levels of idiocy, but it's getting dangerously close. Sony realised it, so pulled the game of.
I pity all that normal people living there...one day you are going to wake up, and you'll find that all sexual intercourse would be forbidden by law, reproduction would have to be in a laboratory and the Victorian London will look like Sodome compared to Washington...
dude, i have a girlfriend
GTA.SA did not have sex in the beginning and it was a normal standard violent game like any game before it and then, POW someone made a sex mod for it and all hell broke loose, it is racist, violent, gory, bloody... BUT!!!!! it can not have sex, thank God it was not a lesbian sex mod or we would still be here listening jack crying about it.
sex today is just over rated, sorry, IT IS, my cousin knew about sex when he was 10 but had very bad concepts about it because he learned it from his school colleges, not from a video games.
This is were family comes in, to help kids learn correct knowledge about things like this.
and i have never seen proxess faking to kill combine..... i have only seen him faking to kill antlions with a gravity gun. J/K :p
It's really annoying, hopefully theyll port it later