death camps

[kittenOFchaos]

Assimilate or be given over to Uber!

I bring a better way of life and all they can do is moan!!! Uberise them all!

[drake]

In SMAC you can capture a city and disband it which I tried once. I must admit I felt quite sick when it came up with 30000 citizens have been put to death. I didn't do it again.

Same type of thing happened in Baldur's Gate when I got bored and decided my group should go on a killing spree in the town killing women and children. Never again...

Oh come on SITS, its just variables in a computer game that you're killing. It's a harmless way to let off some frustration or kill some boredom.

Executing a few thousand computer variables sure beats someone committing real acts of violence somewhere.

[SITS]

Originally posted by drake


Oh come on SITS, its just variables in a computer game that you're killing. It's a harmless way to let off some frustration or kill some boredom.

Executing a few thousand computer variables sure beats someone committing real acts of violence somewhere.

I realise I didn't kill anybody real - what I'm saying is the concept itself knocked me sick. Uber's death camp leaves me with a similar feeling.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Kurgan
I do not think that forced labor increases production.In the WWII, the forced and tortured labor substituted the absent (they were in the fronts) labor force, who were much more productive. It is also true that no forced labor is better than no labor because it has been changed into soldiers.

Kurgan, we're talking about the game here, not what happened in WWII. There is an option under certain government types (in the game) to speed up production in a city at the expense of population points and unrest. Thus, forced labor resulting in the death of population.

[drake]

Why does it make you sick? Its fantasy

I play games in which I use automatic weapons to mow down enemies. I play games in which I deviantly throw molitav cocktails at enemies just to watch them burn to death. I laugh at games in which I can decapitate my enemies.

I watch violent movies all the time, as most of us probably do. I find them equally as entertaining as the video games.

Would I find such actions in real appaling and sickening? Of course I would. But why should I be sickened by something that is totally fantastic? It isnt a reflection of your personality. It doesnt make you sick to enjoy such things. Not at all

[SuiteSisterMary]

I'll point out that Master Of Orion 2 had the option, when taking an enemy planet, to start exterinating the local populace. About a population point per turn, as I recall. Much easier than building the diplomatic buildings and trying to assimilate them into your culture.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by drake
Why does it make you sick? Its fantasy

I play games in which I use automatic weapons to mow down enemies. I play games in which I deviantly throw molitav cocktails at enemies just to watch them burn to death. I laugh at games in which I can decapitate my enemies.

I watch violent movies all the time, as most of us probably do. I find them equally as entertaining as the video games.

Would I find such actions in real appaling and sickening? Of course I would. But why should I be sickened by something that is totally fantastic? It isnt a reflection of your personality. It doesnt make you sick to enjoy such things. Not at all

First of all, as a side note, I find it really ironic that the political party that most complained about overly-violent video games and movies corrupting our kids is the most gung-ho about real life bombing and shooting in Afghanistan. Great example to the kids...

ANYHOO...

I can't believe the death camp issue is coming up again. It's simply something most people do not want to see in the game. It's inappropriate and unneccessary. Firaxis would be nuts to include it.

As I've said before, if a computer game came out that simulated raping a woman, would you have any desire to see that? Would you want any game company to release such a product? Would you want kids seeing/playing that?

I find the notion of death camps equally disturbing.

[drake]

I dont think its going to say "death camps" even if thats what is present boris.

Many of us play civ strictly as a game of conquest. The idea of a single nation ravaging the rest of the world, clearly killing millions upon millions of people to achieve the goal is more comforting to you than death camps?

The simulated atrocities that you can inflict on enemies in civ2 far outweigh ideas about death camps.

Think about it. Is a nation destroying all others, for no other reason but selfish ones (in-discriminate genocide), any better than death camps? Not even close.

This argument is going nowhere at all.

Rape is a whole new ball game. Has nothing to do with civ or this discussion.

[LarryLard]

Originally posted by drake
Why does it make you sick? Its fantasy

It's called empathy.

[drake]

Oh jesus. Please dont get me started about empathy larry

I have the utmost empathy for real people. Little bits in a computer whose variables are named "citizens", I have no empathy for, you got me.

ok, so lets see if youre a hypocrite larry.......you and the rest of the people that slam ubers idea.

Do you play for conquest? Do you ever attack other civs? Destroy other civs?

If the answer is yes, than you are in effect of your arguments condoning war and the killing of innocent civilians. You guys glamourize war like its something beautiful. Death is ugly whether its in a death camp or on a battlefield.

Playing high and mighty about death camps while at the same time, going on world wide campaigns of genocide makes you a hypocrite. Please see the err of your sorry arguments.

[LarryLard]

Originally posted by drake
I have the utmost empathy for real people. Little bits in a computer whose variables are named "citizens", I have no empathy for, you got me.

Has a work of fiction ever induced an emotional response in you? I'd be surprised if you say 'No, never'.

And as for my play style, I do tend to be quite pacifistic, but I will react if provoked. Occasionally I step down a difficulty level and play for conquest, yes, but I try and make it quick

Death is ugly whether its in a death camp or on a battlefield.

But only one involves intentional suffering.

[drake]

A piece of literature? Sure. A movie? Sure. A game? No.

Civ is not about politics. Its about fun.

Occasionally I step down a difficulty level and play for conquest, yes, but I try and make it quick

This isnt about intentional suffering?

Yes it is.

Drop the sorry argument. Its pathetic.

[Mannamagnus]

So what will be the next suggestion; torture chambers to have captured workers reveal the location of enemy cities?

I have the utmost empathy for real people. Little bits in a computer whose variables are named "citizens", I have no empathy for, you got me.

It's not about some sprites on a computer screen, it's about the person playing the game and enjoying the idea of deathcamps.
Gameplay is not served with this sick idea, disbanding a city in an akward location by the push of a button suffices.

[drake]

Answer my questions mannagamus...

Do you play for conquest at all? Ever destroy other civs?

If the answer is yes, you are off your imaginary high ground.

Enjoying civ as a vehicle for conquest is just as sick and twisted as enjoying the ideas of death camps with the logic you use.

[Jason Beaudoin]

I think all of you should get a grip on yourselves. This is just a game, and if Ubrux's strategy works, why not employ it.

I understand why some people here are offended. The way he writes his scenario, it is obvious that he takes pleasure out of the simulated torturing of his occupied subjects. His writing is reminicent of a child who is fascinated with burning insects; I know... it's a little shallow, but I wouldn't be so ready to dismiss his tactics. After all, this is just a game, and if I could get forced production from captured citizens at no negative effect over my general population (in my own empire), then I'd probably do it too.

Selling the city buildings is also a great idea. After all, they are virtually useless to you in cultural terms, so why not. You may as well.

BTW, razing a city to the ground is also an atrocity in my books, but I'm sure many of you will use it in your game.

Let's not take this game too seriously.

[drake]

Thank you jason.......making uber out like he's personally a bad person (or immature) for wanting to see such a feature is ridiculous.

[Mannamagnus]

Answer my questions mannagamus...

I spare the civilians and after having assimilated the cities the people are always much happier than they were before.

Enjoying civ as a vehicle for conquest is just as sick and twisted as enjoying the ideas of death camps with the logic you use.

Not true; I enjoy empire building. Conquest is for me only a small part of the game and certainly not the most rewarding.

[drake]

I spare the civilians and after having assimilated the cities the people are always much happier than they were before.

More BS

You can't "spare" civilians in civ at all. Conquering a people is no more noble than sending them to death camps.

We had "poison water supply" as an option in civ2. That is certainly as dispicable an idea as death camps.

Nuke weapons, even worse.

If youre going to argue against death camps and similarly as slimy ideas, you should also argue against military units whose only intention is to destroy.

[Earthling7]

Originally posted by drake
A piece of literature? Sure. A movie? Sure. A game? No.

Why are a few black symbols on a piece of paper, or an overpaid actor faking death more emotionally disturbing than some digital variations called citizens?

It is just a game, but do you play it by numbers? When you are playing, are you just playing a game or are you ruling the world? If you're just playing a game, you're missing out on a lot.

[Mannamagnus]

I never poisoned one water supply and I have nukes disabled in Rules.txt.
If you say that a military campaign is equal to having deathcamps you basicaly also say that what Bush is doing now is similar to what Hitler and Stalin were doing (only on a smaller scale, but hey ... he's new to the job )

[drake]

It is just a game, but do you play it by numbers? When you are playing, are you just playing a game or are you ruling the world? If you're just playing a game, you're missing out on a lot.

I love role playing and getting engulfed in the game. But I also have the ability to step back and realize its still a game afterwords.

If you say that a military campaign is equal to having deathcamps you basicaly also say that what the Bush is doing now is similar to what Hitler and Stalin were doing (only on a smaller scale, but hey ... he's new to the job )

I didnt say military campaign I said conquest

HUGE difference

[Frozen_Vomit]

I have an even better addition to this tacktik. Why forced laber to rush build new units when u can simply draft the population

U can make the conquered citizens fight for your empire against their own....

[RallyK]

I agree that drafting the population is the better choice. (Not because I have a problem with forcing people to work to their death in the game.)

If I have to nuke a city or two in order to win a game, I will do so. The AI normally deserves it for backstabbing.

[Sava]

Originally posted by LaRusso


Yeah you have some Serbian blood, so you must be sick

.25 Serbian
.25 Croat
.25 Macedonian
.25 Slovak

The Serbian side is definitely embraced in my family more, though.

Yes, I am sick. I want to create a game that contains unheardof terrorist acts that you can attempt against a rival civ. How about releasing massive amounts of salt into the source of a river, thus making the land in the floodplains unable to grow anything, thus starving millions... MUHAHAHAHHA

[Boliao]

Comm'on guys ...I am sure u play Half-Life or those shooting games or even Commandos where u can slit the German soldier's throat..its only Quote: "sprites on a computer screen"

[Sava]

Originally posted by Boliao
Comm'on guys ...I am sure u play Half-Life or those shooting games or even Commandos where u can slit the German soldier's throat..its only Quote: "sprites on a computer screen"

I enjoy headshots in Counter-Strike[tm].

I got another idea, how about hijacking a crop-duster and... wait a minute... nevermind.

[Frozen_Vomit]

How about an option where u can choose what things to fire whit your catapult- throwing corpses of slain solders behind enemy fortifications sound funny, they did so middle age

[August Borms]

Slain soldiers? Pfff, I'd rather throw bodies of people who died of the plague over the city walls

[Mahdimael]

Is it a disturbing idea? Certainly...it violates our sense of decency...but it really doesn't mean anything when dealing with a computer game.

Besides, any evil action in the game does have a reaction. If you played CtP2 and used slaves, you had the possibility of slave riots.

This is no different. I remember reading that if you conscript or use forced labor, the city will eventually revolt, no matter how many police units are in it. And one would assume that there would be diplomatic ramifications both internally and externally.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by SuiteSisterMary
I'll point out that Master Of Orion 2 had the option, when taking an enemy planet, to start exterinating the local populace. About a population point per turn, as I recall. Much easier than building the diplomatic buildings and trying to assimilate them into your culture.

Not if your race was telepathic, like mine. They always assimilated before I could say: 'Resistance is...'.