Curse

Kumu Honua · May 10, 2009, 01:46 PM // 13:46

Quoting the rating and what the ESRB says about that rating is a paper tiger. NCSoft could have the game reclassified to be M, and STILL require you to watch your mouth or suffer bannination.

Heck, they could add an NPC that follows you around shouting obscenities at you in text as well as voice, and STILL require you to watch your mouth or suffer bannination.

The rating is just to tell parents what they might expect from a game. Additionally, all MMO's that I have ever seen has had an additional caveat that online game play may vary that rating.

Of course it's all moot. The rating has nothing to do with the content of the rules.

MagmaRed · May 10, 2009, 01:56 PM // 13:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

GW's gamescape belongs to everyone who purchase the game and are allow to log in to play.

turning off chat filter is not going into someones room or purposely recording someone swearing, we are all in the place that we had to be. THERE IS NO SEPERATE ROOM, THE GAME IS A SHARE EXPERIENCE.

True, there aren't seperate rooms. But as it is legal in the USA to own a gun, it is not legal to take it with you on an airline flight. Language is restricted in the game, and you are told that when you sign the EULA. If you want to use the language they say is not allowed, use it in places other people who see don't mind, or face the consequences of using it.

haggus71 · May 10, 2009, 10:36 PM // 22:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagmaRed

True, there aren't seperate rooms. But as it is legal in the USA to own a gun, it is not legal to take it with you on an airline flight. Language is restricted in the game, and you are told that when you sign the EULA. If you want to use the language they say is not allowed, use it in places other people who see don't mind, or face the consequences of using it.

the thing is, going back to the OP(wow), the guy was banned for trying to get around the filter, so your point is moot. I've cussed plenty on general chat, and have still to get a ban...because I don't try to get around their set blocks! If you try to cheat the processes they set in the game, you deserve what you get.

As I said before, we pay a fee to play the game based on the rules we all AGREED to when we hit 'agree' on the EULA. As long as you aren't making slanderous remarks based on race, gender or creed, and don't try to get by their system, they leave you alone.

The irony is it's usually the ones who they are supposed to be protecting with the filter(under 18) who probably cuss and swear the most in-game.

Fitz Rinley · May 11, 2009, 05:39 AM // 05:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doofledust

It is the content of the game, not the players, that is rated. It also may or may not contain any of the quoted content. I don't think I've seen any blood in Guild Wars nor can I remember any crude humour that wasn't player created. Male warriors in their skivvies humping female ele's in their lingerie don't count as it's player created.

Hmmm, please pass me the Flaming Sceptre Mage darling, and what exactly Are those gargoyles flashing..., and don't you just love a fish with a healing touch, Oh, my! Further, what spear is long on a grawl whose weapon is a bow? Then there is Lispy Stinkface – nothing crude about that snake in a dark hole! And how exactly does Bonfaaz get his fur burnt while accompanied by a brown-noser named Jaw Smokeskin, (and what skin is jaw smoking?) – but of course there is No crude humor in the game. Should I continue looking or is this 10 minutes in the Bestiary sufficient?

Quote:

The filter lets you the player know which words are allowed in the game. Dropping the filter does not mean you are allowed to use those words, just that you don't mind seeing them on-screen, or that you want to see what they are so that you can report the user.

Actually, what you have done is take a secondary meaning of the word may so that you can hinge your entire argument on its limitation, rather than on the expansive value which undermines it. The uses of the word supporting my argument are more common, legal, and expansive.
may =
1. To be allowed or permitted to: May I take a swim? Yes, you may.
2. Used to indicate a certain measure of likelihood or possibility: It may rain this afternoon.
3. Used to express a desire or fervent wish: Long may he live!
4. Used to express contingency, purpose, or result in clauses introduced by that or so that: expressing ideas so that the average person may understand.
5. To [B]be obliged; must. Used in statutes, deeds, and other legal documents [B]. See Usage Note at can1.
Now let us look carefully in consideration of the grammar pattern in definition number 4:
TEEN
Titles rated T (Teen) have content that may be suitable for ages 13 and older. Titles in this category may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language.
This indicates the game is not intended for exposure to those under 13, and is expressly stated so as to be clear that to the average person that the game is not for exposure to those under the age of 13.
Now let us look again at the definition of Teen in consideration of the remaining definitions of may:
TEEN
Titles rated T (Teen) have content that may be suitable for ages 13 and older. Titles in this category may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language.
1. To be allowed or permitted to contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language
2. Used to indicate a certain measure of likelihood or possibility: It may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language
3. Used to express a desire or fervent wish: Long may it contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language!
5. To be obliged; must contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language.
The problem with those who say, I only saw X on the box is they are in fact selectively misrepresenting their evidence. They saw a Teen rating on the box, and only looked at the strongest caveats. They did not bother to research the actual marketing label and so feel that they got only the part they wanted instead of the complete package. Then because they complain NC West becomes concerned and caters to immature demands for immature and childish communications, rather than maturing Teen communications. Afterall, if we are going to insist the evaluating definitions can be picked from at random for what we want, let’s start insisting that communications without swearing be banned. (Am I serious not really, it’s about the point.) If you want to limit everyone to the vocabulary of a 7 year old then we ought to be able to equally limit you to the colorful vocabulary of the 90 year old retired decorated combat veteran with pinned and plated parts and a masculine cultural heritage from WW II. O, but that is right the generation that paved the way for Democracy is something we are ashamed of and whose heritage and culture are to be looked down upon and denigrated…

And what do we see taking all of may into account? That the game is intended to (and in fact does) contain crude humor and strong langauge. NC West is hypocritical for banning people acting within the behavior of play expectable from the rating definition. Further, they are two-faced for doing those things which they deny to players. Such as refusing to allow the word ‘Bite’ as in Anklebiter for a petname on an American Server, because in France the word ‘bite’ is supposed to mean something naughty, while they maintain the boss Frostbite.

Martin Alvito · May 11, 2009, 05:56 AM // 05:56

Fitz, argue from the ESRB ratings all you want, but:

ANet has spent money to create private property (the servers). You're effectively renting space on said private property.

They can set whatever exclusionary rules they want on said private property. It may be true that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech..." but that doesn't hold on private property.

If they want to tell you that if you offend anyone you will be kicked out of the community permanently, they can do it under the law. This is an extremely easy application of existing legal precedent. None of the exceptions apply in this case.

That's all you need to know about the situation.

Apok Omen · May 11, 2009, 06:13 AM // 06:13

Actually, 99% of the people who report others for saying curse words are the same people who turned off the filter.

I know I turned off the filter because I didn't like seeing "I'm targetting ----ed Cleric!" or "I'm attacking Captian ----ang!".... Maybe I should just simply /report Anet.

Also, a large number of the people who use the /report command are the same that commit the same violations. They just get off by banning someone who says RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO or jew or shit, and then continue to say it in chat.

Face it, the whole "can't say this or that" on the internet thing is idiotic. Many people abuse it.

Also, could someone explain to me why "sega" is filtered????

Fitz Rinley · May 11, 2009, 08:08 AM // 08:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Alvito

That's all you need to know about the situation.

No it isn't. Because a hyporitical two-faced liar is a hypcritical two-faced liar. Someone that parades around as something they are not is a liar. Someone that advertizes themselves as something they are not is a liar.

You are correct, they are free, within or without restraint of law to commit any ethical, legal, or other violation they want to my person or anyone elses.

What they should not expect however, is to lie to me with impunity. They advertised the game as Teen. If they do not abide by this rating then they are liars. It is that simple. Those who feel all juiced up and rabid because they are trained racist against a few White Anglo-Saxon words can support the liar all they want. But the reality will remain what it really is. And this is all I need to know - the Truth.

Fril Estelin · May 11, 2009, 10:01 AM // 10:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

They advertised the game as Teen. If they do not abide by this rating then they are liars. It is that simple.

A thought I had a while ago while reading your posts in this thread: if it's that "simple", why don't you sue Anet/NCsoft for that? "Simple" translates immediately in penalties in court, so it should be an easy win.

refer · May 11, 2009, 01:00 PM // 13:00

The words are fine IMO. It only really becomes a problem how they are used or when they are used gratuitously. It's one thing to say "I took a shit" versus "You are a piece of shit" or "I can't believe that shitty level. It's so RED ENGINEing shit! [overload on swears with sentences spliced inbetween]."

lol can we even swear on this site, if not FAIL. oh well.

Fitz Rinley · May 11, 2009, 02:33 PM // 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

A thought I had a while ago while reading your posts in this thread: if it's that "simple", why don't you sue Anet/NCsoft for that? "Simple" translates immediately in penalties in court, so it should be an easy win.

First, lack of interest in Law Suits as a general way to handle things. I am, in my 42nd year, considering legal action against an entity for the first time. This has to do with refusing to follow laws on open government.

Law suits are a measure of last resort in a civilized region where in previous societies the only other recourse to justice would be violence. I do not need a judge to inform me when NC West is justified or convicted of mistreating someone.

When they fail to properly confirm to someone in processing that an account is made, and that person makes another attempt, and they call someone who is an honorably discharged combat veteran with decades of civil service sense then a 'fraud' and terminate this persons account - I do not need to sue them for libel in order to know that they are guilty.

When they advertise a specific rating, and then cherry pick which parts of that rating they want to abide by and when to enforce on those to whom the rating applies venues appropriate to a lesser classification of development, I do not need a court to tell me they are deceptive. When they punish people for things that do not meet prurient standards while themselves failing to abide by these same standards I know they are convicted as two-faced or hypocrites. (In example: Banning a guild for the use of the tag SuKa (variation of Ebonics Sucka from American Sucker, meaning one who is gullible or foolish) because it has several slang meanings in a language they do not speak.)

There are ultimately only two violations anyone can commit - misuse of force and misrepresentation of truth. I do not need a court to know when these things have occured. Further, given the lack of morality and manners displayed by people today, the more of it I experience the more I lean toward a belief that an armed society is a polite society.

Tullzinski · May 11, 2009, 05:37 PM // 17:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagmaRed

The filter is not there to allow people to swear. Swearing is against the rules. The filter is there because Anet knows some people will break the rules, and the people who do not want to see that language can have it filtered for them when people break the rules.
Parents of some kids allow them to play, but require them to have the filter on. Those kids may swear at school and hear that kind of language all the time, but that doesn't mean their parents want them to see/hear it. So when people are swearing when those kids are playing, they don't see it, they see the **** instead.

Does this mean people are allowed to swear? No, it clearly states in the EULA that it is inappropriate and not tolerated. Does that mean that ALL swearing will result in bans? No, only the people who use it where other people don't want to see it, and report them. If your guild is fine with swearing and you swear in guild chat, fine, no problems. However, if you are swearing in local chat, and someone who doesn't appreciate that kind of language is there, they may report you, and you may well be banned because of it.

The filter does not allow you to swear anywhere, anytime. The filter is there to protect people who don't want to see that language when people who swear break the rules.

The filter is not permission to swear.... is it really a hard concept to grasp?

I agree the filter is not present to give people the freedom to swear. Also agree with you that it is there since ANET knows people will attempt to break the rule. But you never answer the question....

Keep in mind:
1. ANET writes EULA to not allow swearing.
2. ANET knows people will swear.

Why is there an option to turn the filter off?

Answer is:
1. ANET Failed to remove the on/off button on the filter. The protection should be always on. No if and or buts about it.

Otherwise this makes no sense to put a filter in but allow people to turn it off. As you state it is strictly against ANETs rules/EULA(see highlighted EULA below). Remember, I am strictly dealing with the fact that swearing is not allowed and the filter can be turned off. It makes sense (god forbid) for ANET to remove the ability to turn the filter off. If a person then bypasses the filter ban accordingly. But to make a rule then give everyone the power to so easily bypass the rule they created is ignorant. Furthermore to then punish people for breaking the rule after ANET gave you the power to break its own rule is crap (except in the case where a person deliberately bypassed the filter). It is also crap for someone to turn off the filter then get offended if they see a swear word. (again not talking about people that bypass the filter on purpose)

NOT saying nor did I ever state that; since the filter has an on/off that is it permission to swear. Also, your little statement asking me if that is a hard concept to grasp is uncalled for and insulting.

At one point you state that if a guild is fine with swearing in their own chat box, then it is not a problem for them to swear. However as you correctly point out "it clearly states in the EULA that it is inappropriate and not tolerated". No group should be allowed to decide on their own it is OK to break the rules regardless of the situation. Everyone cannot have it both ways. Does the EULA state that a guild/group can decide on their own if it is ok to swear?

ANET needs to either remove the rule against swearing or remove the ability to turn off the filter. My vote is to remove the rule. I want to swear like the true sailor I am!!!

Here is the EULA reference to language:

In the Game(s), characters have the privilege of sending server wide messages called "Chat Messages." With this privilege comes a high level of responsibility on the part of the user. Due to the fact that this communication channel has the ability to impact every player on the server, NC Interactive will not tolerate any inappropriate behavior of any sort in this chat channel. This includes but is not limited to: inappropriate language of any sort or any attempt to escape the profanity filter, inappropriate or vulgar content of any sort, repeated "spamming," or "flooding" of the chat messages channel, or any other conduct determined to be inappropriate by NC Interactive Support, in its sole discretion. Any violation of this term or rules of conduct may, in the sole discretion of NC Interactive, lead to the temporary removal of the character's ability to communicate, the account being suspended for a set period of time, or lead to permanent account closure.

thedarkmarine · May 11, 2009, 08:34 PM // 20:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

The problem with those who say, I only saw X on the box is they are in fact selectively misrepresenting their evidence. They saw a Teen rating on the box, and only looked at the strongest caveats. They did not bother to research the actual marketing label and so feel that they got only the part they wanted instead of the complete package.

You still haven't looked up their ratings even though I posted them for you, eh? It's ironic that you accuse the others of not doing research when you still can't navigate a simple website.

FalconDance · May 11, 2009, 08:37 PM // 20:37

Why is the word "urine" bleeped out in the filter but not the word "piss"? (Noticed today in whisper with an Alliance member while discussing what would take out the odor of animal accidents on floors.)

It's weirdness like that which makes me think a goodly part of the 'dirty word' ban in GW is about so much hooey.

Fitz Rinley · May 12, 2009, 01:30 AM // 01:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedarkmarine

You still haven't looked up their ratings even though I posted them for you, eh? It's ironic that you accuse the others of not doing research when you still can't navigate a simple website.

The Dark Marine,

What you posted was:

Quote:

From the ESRB:
Guild Wars NC Soft Teen Use of Alcohol, Violence
Guild Wars Bonus Mission Pack ArenaNet Teen Animated Blood, Mild Suggestive Themes, Violence
Guild Wars: Eye of the North ArenaNet Teen Mild Suggestive Themes, Use of Alcohol, Violence
Guild Wars Nightfall ArenaNet Teen Use of Alcohol, Violence
Guild Wars Factions ArenaNet Teen Suggestive Themes, Use of Alcohol, Violence

From the PEGI:
GUILD WARS EYE OF THE NORTH 12+ Game contains depictions of violence
GUILD WARS FACTIONS 11+/12+ Game contains depictions of violence
Guild Wars Nightfall 11+/12+ Game contains depictions of violence
Guild Wars Prophecies 12+ Game contains depictions of violence

You clearly have not visited the sites, and I have: PEGI and ESRB. That is why I, 1) know where they are, and 2) know what they have to say. But then I also was able to use a dictionary so I could demonstrate what they mean in standard American.

Again, what you quote caries an inordinate emphasis on limited parts of the definition only because you wish to be blind to the other components of the actual definition of Teen rating put out by ESRB. Because you do not want to observe a fact does not keep that fact from existing.

thedarkmarine · May 12, 2009, 01:50 AM // 01:50

Irony of ironies!

It is you who is too zealous to apply the T rating to the game, even though one size doesn't fit all! You say you are able to use a dictionary but can't apply the correct definition of "may!"

You then accuse me of not visiting the sites when my post was copy/pasted from those sites. Me being blinded to the other components of the T rating?! By no means! My post uses their words, and you who think you know them so well shows your ignorance once again!

One more time, those organizations gave a T rating to GW and friends but not because of the language.

Fitz Rinley · May 12, 2009, 05:54 AM // 05:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedarkmarine

Irony of ironies!

It is you who is too zealous to apply the T rating to the game, even though one size doesn't fit all! You say you are able to use a dictionary but can't apply the correct definition of "may!"

You then accuse me of not visiting the sites when my post was copy/pasted from those sites. Me being blinded to the other components of the T rating?! By no means! My post uses their words, and you who think you know them so well shows your ignorance once again!

One more time, those organizations gave a T rating to GW and friends but not because of the language.

No, one size does not fit all. Really, the reason they have different sizes is because one size does not fit all. That is why there is a size EC, and another E, and another E10+, and another T, and another M, and another AO.

What I showed you on the definition of may is that you are attempting badly to apply a secondary definition of it and the entire definition does not support your claim - so you have to narrow your mind to make it fit.

Your post uses the soundbite placed in on-line ads, and fails to research what the definitions of those soundbites really is. When I present the complete definition and source you can't handle the truth.

One more time, ESRB and PEGI gave a Teen rating and a PEGI 12+ rating to GW because the content fell within a certain realm of expected and expectable parameters. That rating advertizes that the game is within those parameters. A Teen rated game does not advertise that it contains alcoholic references suitable for 13 year olds but all other aspects of the game should be for kindergardeners.

Further, the rating system requires all game content and intended additions be submitted at the time of rating. At the time GW was submitted for its first rating, the monster known as the Damned Cleric did exist in the game, or had to be reviewed and included for the rating purposes before the game could be released with the ESRB rating approved. That means that you are dead wrong and the game was rated for language and it was rated for, "infrequent use of strong language."

thedarkmarine · May 12, 2009, 01:07 PM // 13:07

Wow, you totally missed the first point. I was referring to just the T rating; not all T games are created equal.

Just go use the search bar in those sites. Stop trying to hide behind the ESRB and PEGI when even they don't support you. If GW were to allow strong language, then they'd include that in the content descriptors.

No, things like "damned cleric" don't count. Otherwise, they'd be flagged in games like Diablo.

Basically, where's my nudity in Half-life?

MagmaRed · May 12, 2009, 02:19 PM // 14:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tullzinski

At one point you state that if a guild is fine with swearing in their own chat box, then it is not a problem for them to swear. However as you correctly point out "it clearly states in the EULA that it is inappropriate and not tolerated". No group should be allowed to decide on their own it is OK to break the rules regardless of the situation. Everyone cannot have it both ways. Does the EULA state that a guild/group can decide on their own if it is ok to swear?

You are correct that the EULA does not allow for anyone to break the language rule at any time. However, as Anet does not charge monthly fees, they do not have the money to pay someone to monitor chat. Even if they did, I doubt it would be possible for a full staff to monitor all chat all the time. Because of this, they rely on the players to /report the rule breakers.

In other words, Anet does not allow for you to swear in guild chat, but since they can't monitor it they allow it until someone reports it.

And Fitz..... god lord.... you are how old? And still can't figure out that not all games with the same rating got that rating for the same reason? Some have violence, and so got a T rating. Other have no violence whatsoever, but have swearing, so they got a T rating. I'd be afraid to admit I was your friend if I knew you in real life.

Tullzinski · May 12, 2009, 06:34 PM // 18:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagmaRed

You are correct that the EULA does not allow for anyone to break the language rule at any time. However, as Anet does not charge monthly fees, they do not have the money to pay someone to monitor chat. Even if they did, I doubt it would be possible for a full staff to monitor all chat all the time. Because of this, they rely on the players to /report the rule breakers.

In other words, Anet does not allow for you to swear in guild chat, but since they can't monitor it they allow it until someone reports it.

/Agree...impossible to monitor it 24/7.

Which takes me back to the removal of the on/off on the filter.

Then everyone takes thier chances bypassing filter.

Targren · May 12, 2009, 07:20 PM // 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apok Omen

Also, could someone explain to me why "sega" is filtered????

Probably because, in Italian, it refers to a certain intimate and solitary activity...