Slashdot Log In
Leisure Suit Larry's Maker On Wedgies v. Bullets
Posted by
timothy
on Wed May 31, 2006 04:49 PM
from the goose-the-bad-guy dept.
from the goose-the-bad-guy dept.
simoniker writes "Al Lowe, the creator of lounge lizard Leisure Suit Larry, has been talking about his comeback game with new developer iBase Studios, Sam Suede, asking why games nowadays are too violent, and revealing of his new title: "there's going to be guards, but instead of slitting their throats, you'll give them a wedgie." He also asks: 'Let me put this way, the shelf is full of racing games and shooters, RPGs and action games. Where are the comedies?' Well, where are they?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Please don't comment unless.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Please don't comment unless.... (Score:4, Informative)
Oh, and wasn't there a key combo that let you bypass the age questions? I was definitely not 18 when I played it, and neither was I American enough to know the answers to many of the questions, so I cheated.
Parent
I find this game offensive (Score:5, Funny)
Total agreement about the violence. (Score:5, Insightful)
Seems like blatently dangerous and illegal activity is endorsed by the industry (shooting people; blowing things up; etc) - while perfectly legal stuff (wasn't the sex in the GTA mod consentual?) ends up being shunned and forbidden.
What kind of lesson is that?
If I were making the rules; game rating should he based on the illegality of the activities in the game -- if there's murder or similar - keep it away from my kids. If it's minor misdemeanors (like this new game sounds like) that's better.
Re:Total agreement about the violence. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it was consentual and legal...as long as you don't consider prostitution to be illegal and believe that prostitutes aren't effectively coerced into prostitution because of other circumstances in their life.
If I were making the rules; game rating should he based on the illegality of the activities in the game -- if there's murder or similar - keep it away from my kids.
You're a parent. It's your job to make sure that your kids are only exposed to things you find appropriate. That's why you should paying attention to what your children watch, play and listen to. And it's also not a bad idea to keep up with what they're learning from their friends and in school to make sure it matches your belief system. <tinfoil>And you should feel free to speak out if you don't like the idea that your kids are learning to be submissive to all form of authority while not learning to actually think for themselves</tinfoil> (yeah, I think that's the case, but it's pretty tinfoil hat-ish).
If you rely on the government or some industry or another to monitor what your kids learn and see, I'd wager your going to be VERY disappointed someday.
Parent
Re:Total agreement about the violence. (Score:4, Insightful)
"Here is the pulse. And here is your finger, far from the pulse, shoved straight up your ass. Want a pretzel?" Okay so that's a loose quote...
But the point is that we have a SERIOUS problem with YOUTH violence, AND a serious problem with adult violence for that matter. It's much more serious than any sex problem, because sex only involves the participants but violence has a tendency to spill over and bother the neighbors. Just today one of my coworkers came in and told us a story about someone doing a drive-by on her house because they thought she was involved with a man that the other woman isn't even with any more. These women are all in their twenties and I can't think of a time when a drive-by has ever occurred in this county. The cops are totally flustered by it, because it never happens.
Personally, I was quite aware of and interested in pursuing sex as a teenager, but never even had any opportunity. What I did get was constant physical harassment... the daily ass-kicking. Well, it was seldom serious, but every day after school I had to be concerned that I would be attacked. On the other hand, I never had to be concerned that I would be fucked.
I do not think you know what you are talking about. I think you have been contaminated by puritan ideals.
Parent
Re:Total agreement about the violence. (Score:5, Insightful)
And if we want people to use condoms, we should teach girls how to put them on for guys. Guys don't have a stake in the matter; they don't get pregnant. Therefore the decision should not be left to them.
Our treatment of sex is what causes problems. And at any rate, teen pregnancy is easily solved, unlike the products of violence.
Parent
Re:Wow, please think again (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact is that teens 1) Wanna and 2) Gonna so we had better darn well make them 3) ready.
Our options are not stopping them from having sex or not, it's making them prepared for when they have it.
On the one hand you're arguing that teenagers are too immature to have sex. On the other hand, you're arguing that they should be mature enough to know not to have sex. Huh? They're KIDS. They're raging balls of insecurity glued together by drunken hormones and a throbbing fire in their loins. That's why they do incredibly stupid, dangerous, and mind-blowingly weird things. That's why they're not mature enough to have sex. That's why they're not mature enough to refrain from having sex. So that's why the way we protect them is by teaching them how to have sex responsibly, not to pretend that they won't until some point in the unknown future when they're magically "ready".
And women should be taught how to put a condom on a guy. Maybe the person they're with isn't mature enough to know how. And if they're not mature enough to know how to put on a condom, they're certainly not mature enough to exhibit the self-restraint to keep it in their pants. A girl should know how to put a condom on a guy every bit as much as a guy should know what schedule the girl is on for her birth control pills. And they should feel not just compelled but also responsible for the decision. At the risk of sounding corny, a condom isn't effective because it goes on one person, it's effective because it goes between two people. Sure, the guy should be responsible enough to put one on. And if they're not, the woman should put one on for him, while teaching him proper technique and taunting him for his inexperience and lack of maturity.
It doesn't matter whose fault it is. It doesn't matter what kids "should" and "shouldn't" do. Just be safe. And keep them safe. And teach them to be safe.
Parent
Re:Total agreement about the violence. (Score:5, Informative)
Just grabbing the first document [guttmacher.org] I could find on google which talks about international rates of teen pregnancy, we find that "Adolescent pregnancy, birth, abortion and sexually transmitted disease (STD) rates are much higher in the United States than in most other developed countries" and that Sweden - a country stereotypically considered to be very open about sex - has a teen pregnancy rate of less than a quarter of that in the US[1], despite having higher levels of sexual activity[2]. The rates of sexually transmitted diseases are also lower in Sweden.[3]
So, no, I can't say that the evidence supports your claim that censoring sexuality does anything to prevent people from "having sex and getting into trouble" when the actual numbers show that more open policies substantially reduce rates of the quantifiable forms of "trouble" which you cited. ("Damaged psyches" isn't really quantifiable, but I submit that, when they result from sex, it is due to either feeling exploited or to societal censure (e.g., being seen as "a slut", whether by yourself or by others) - and both of these would be substantially reduced if sexuality were treated in a more open fashion rather than being suppressed.)
[1] "The proportion of women aged 20-24 who had a child before age 20 is a useful summary indicator that reflects the differences in teenage birthrates by country. This proportion is lowest in Sweden (4%)... and highest in the United States (22%)."
[2] "The proportion of women aged 20-24 who had first intercourse before age 20 varies from 75% in Canada to 86% in Sweden, with the United States (81%), France (83%) and Great Britain (85%) having intermediate levels", "Data on the proportion of all 18-19-year-olds who are currently sexually active (i.e., who had sex in the last three months) are available for four countries. The United States has the lowest proportion (59%), with France and Great Britain (62-64%) having somewhat higher levels, and Sweden (79%) having the highest level"
[3] "The incidence of chlamydia among adolescents in the United States (1,132 cases per 100,000) is nearly twice that in Canada and Sweden", "The annual incidence of gonorrhea among all U.S. adolescents (572 cases per 100,000) is 10 or more times the level in the other four countries."
Parent
No funny games? (Score:5, Informative)
Metal Arms - Glitch in the System
Conker's Bad Fur Day
The Bard's Tale (PS2, XBox, PC)
Metal Gear 3 - Snake Eater (very comical commentary, involving a box)
These are just off the top of my head.
Brevity is the soul of wit (Score:5, Insightful)
Comedy is hard.
Comedy is... (Score:5, Insightful)
blowing shit up is (relatively) easy.
It gets old (Score:4, Insightful)
Comedy? Depends on what makes you laugh... (Score:4, Insightful)
...but maybe that says more about me than it does about the game...
Save us from kiddie "comedy" (Score:4, Insightful)
If the definition of "comedy" being used is "includes wedgies", I think I'd rather not have any "comedy games", thanks.
Now, a game that aimed at a grown-up audience and had a sophisticated sense of humor, that I could get into. But "sophisticated" is not the first word that jumps to mind when I think of Lowe's portfolio, so that's probably too much to hope for.
Re:Save us from kiddie "comedy" (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Comedies went away when the market got too big (Score:4, Insightful)
Those Sierra adventure games were and still are my favourite games.
Replay value (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll tell you... (Score:5, Funny)
I'll tell you where. In your pants! It's a fucking joke down there!
BRING BACK SAM & MAX (Score:4, Insightful)
Full Throttle?
Maniac Mansion/Day of the Tentacle?
Monkey Island?
Lucas isn't good for much any more, but he's got this IP in his vault and isn't doing a fucking thing with it. Instead he's producing uber-violent, xenophobic, pornomythic rubbish for the big screen and grubbing for tie-ins.
I don't know (Score:4, Insightful)
The whole "quest to get laid" was fantastic, and the censored bar moving up and down was pretty damn clever.
Sure, some of the jokes were a bit hacky, but all in all I thought the game was clever and the whole meta-commentary ("it's hard to find the right girl, and when you do she steals all your money") was pretty clever as well.
Parent
Re:I don't know (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:No Funny Games (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Overlooked value of the Sierra-era (Score:5, Insightful)
Like how he'd get sick and turn colors (eventually plaid) and die if you slept with the hooker and didn't use a rubber. That was funny.
Not only was this scene funny, but playing as a 13-year-old it really helped drive home the point that condom use was a good idea.
I'm not saying it is the duty of video games to teach sex ed, nor am I one of those "video games are the root of child violence" people, however, I certainly see value in this sort of thing. Speaking for myself, I have learned stuff from all sorts of goofy sources, and more often than not, entirely accidentally.
Parent
Re:awsome game (Score:5, Funny)
Parent