News

Censorship gone amuck: Mortal Kombat's missing profanity
Posted: 01.05.2011 17:30 by JonahFalcon Comments: 78
Mortal Kombat is one of, if not the most, gory games ever made, allowing you to rip spinal columns out of an enemies torso, or use X-Ray vision to watch skulls and rib cages being shattered like so much fine china, but saying words like "AIDS", "bearded clam", "hermaphrodite", "titty twister" or "wrapping the weasel"? That simply won't do.

A hacker managed to get inside the config file, and what he found were over 700 words that were banned from use in the game. Many are profanities, while others are just words, like "whore".

This is probably at the height of hypocrisy, and typical of the double standard relating to violence, especially in the United States. Which is more mindwarping to kids: saying the word "pussy" or depicting someone getting decapitated with medical accuracy?

Source: GamesRadar

Comments

By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on May 01, 2011
herodotus
I've always wondered at the double stanards in the States, Australia and many other countries when it comes to Sex, Profanity and Violence. Sex and Foul Language are taboo on US commercial television, while in Australia nudity and swearing have always been a trademark of Aussie films and TV ("Barry MacKenzie", "Alvin Purple", "The Box").
Yet Australia cringes at violence these days whereeas in the '70's it revelled in it ("Mad Dog Morgan", "Ned Kelly" with Mick Jagger, "Mad Max").
So "MK" is banned in Australia, but I'm sure if they left the profanity in and took out the violence, we would have it here.
Crazy.
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 01, 2011
PowerJack
I blame the conservative party...
And all the other idiots out there that blame every problem off society on movies/music/games and the like instead of the people themselves.

There are psychos out there or just plain stupid people that do whatever they want.

I have a target list that I've been filling in, only waiting to get an arsenal of weapons and some kind of terminal disease so I can start scratching them 1 by 1 or most of them at the same time if i can get inside the parliament.

So who needs ratings anyway.

RIGHT?! ^.^
By djole381 (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
djole381
@PowerJack
Just grab an AK-47 (with steel tipped ammo) and a full body armor and you'll be inside a parliament in no time XD
By obiwanmccartney (SI Veteran Newbie) on May 02, 2011
obiwanmccartney
AK-47... When you absolutely positively must kill every motherfucker in the room, accept no substitute.
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
FoolWolf
Weird, that foul words fall in such bad grace, when open violence is OK. In the societes it is usually the other way around - those who fights get into trouble in school but those bullying with words get away far more often with it... Ah well, I guess that all over the world are considered to be too easily offended these days. Say concrete and someone will be offended by that too....
By Revan (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
Revan
Dang it! I wanted to beat the bearded clam aids out those whores! And then wrap them around the weasel and give them a titty twister! LOL!

"jizz muffin", "one-way pipe cleaner", "penis breath", "fingerbanger".

That is quite the list! Wonder how the heck they would've been able to make any sense of the characters using these words?! Unless theres a hidden FingerBangality in there somewhere as well?? :D
By djole381 (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
djole381
FingerBangality!!! LOL!!! Now that I would like to see XD
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
PowerJack
@djole381 It's hard to get a machine gun here, its not like this is the States.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
SirRoderick
Just make a brew of gunpowder and fashion a makeshift cannon then
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on May 02, 2011
herodotus
@djole381
Your first comment...been watching Uwe Boll's "Rampage" have you?
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
SirRoderick
If he's been watching Uwe Boll's anything he should be clinnically braindead now.
By djole381 (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
djole381
@herodotus
No. Been watching a documentary about a robbery in the US. The robbers (two of them) made full body armors out of several bullet proof vests and used custom made steel tipped ammo for their AK-47's.
Cops couldn't handle them. They were the only robbers that didn't want to escape the crime scene. The only reason the cops were able to take them down was sheer luck, but not before taking severe casualties themselves.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
SirRoderick
I think I've seen that. Did they have drum magazines?
By djole381 (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
djole381
I think so. Cops hit one guy's thumb so he couldn't unjam the AK-47.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
SirRoderick
That's the one, yeah.
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
PowerJack
That's a great idea maybe I'll try it one of these days
By Eversor (SI Elite) on May 02, 2011
Eversor
@ PowerJack. You blame the wrong party. The Liberal Party is one of the main reasons why somthing like this would be banned. NOT the Conservative party.
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 03, 2011
PowerJack
They would all be in the parliament so I don't really care it would be a win-win situation.
^.^
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on May 03, 2011
herodotus
Djole and Roderick. I think they got the idea from the film "Rampage" - guy in full body armour shooting up the streets of his hometown, totally impervious to the cops (poor old Ned Kelly could have done with that sort of armour).
That's only what I'm hearing - would never have watched a Boll mivie...ever:)
By djole381 (SI Elite) on May 03, 2011
djole381
Yeah, shoot 'em all and let god sort 'em out XD
Well the only movie made by Uwe Boll I ever watched is Blood Rayne. After that I learned my lesson and stay clear from his movies.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 03, 2011
SirRoderick
@eversor
In that case you seem to have a situation where the conservatives are the liberals now? I mean liberals by definition should be (and are here) against this sort of thing.
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 04, 2011
FoolWolf
@SirRoderick - they live in the upsidedown land - remember ;)
By the way - I saw five minutes of Uwe Boll movie once- Horrid. Did he also do the In the name of the King? Then I'm up to fifteen minutes...
By djole381 (SI Elite) on May 04, 2011
djole381
@FoolWolf
Yep, Uwe's responsible for "In the name of the King". To make matters worse, he's working on a sequel.
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
FoolWolf
Argh - is there no stopping Uwe? I thought that Germany changed their rules to stop supporting him with money to make these horrid movies? How come he is still getting fundings and actors to participate?
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
SirRoderick
"Until the law was changed in 2005, Boll was able to acquire funding thanks to German tax laws that reward investments in film. The law allowed investors in German-owned films to write off 100% of their investment as a tax deduction; it also allowed them to invest borrowed money and write off any fees associated with the loan. The investor was then only required to pay taxes on the profits made by the movie; if the movie loses money, the investor got a tax writeoff.[citation needed]

In the DVD commentary of Alone in the Dark, Boll explains how he funds his films: "Maybe you know it but it's not so easy to finance movies in total. And the reason I am able to do these kind of movies is I have a tax shelter fund in Germany, and if you invest in a movie in Germany you get basically fifty percent back from the government." "


SOMEONE JJUST SMUTHER HIM IN HIS SLEEP ALREADY!
IT's the only way he'll ever stop!
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
FoolWolf
Man, if he only made half-decent movies - OK - I might actually come to like the guy - but now----- arghhh! it is painful! Though Aliens vs Zombies - is probably worse then the Boll average movie...
By Eversor (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
Eversor
FoolWolf, the only Uwe Bole film I ever watched was Far Cry. Totally dissapointed. Piece of crap.

@ Roderick. You maybe right. But I don't think so. Liberals like Pres Obama here introduce all of the totally ludacris laws like the Health bill, the Hate Crime bill and all these others that allow scumbags to do what ever they want. That's who I call 'Liberals'.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
SirRoderick
Why is "liberal" such a bad thing for you people? Why do you automatically renounce systems that work very well in just about every other western nation (like healthcare)? I mean I don't want to incite a political debate here, but I find it irrational.
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
PowerJack
Liberal Party, Conservative Party, Communist Party, whatever party.

Neither of them are needed all you need is common sense, which all of them lack.
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
FoolWolf
Whose common sense are you referring to PowerJack?

SirRoderick - coming from the ,socialistic branded Sweden by most Americans, your question is one I often ask of my friends in US as well. :)
By chiefone (SI Veteran Member) on May 05, 2011
chiefone
I'm pretty sure djole is on the terrorist watch list now.
By bosnian_dragon (SI Core) on May 05, 2011
bosnian_dragon
@chiefone - Hahah that's exactly what I'm thinking right now. SI is not a terrorist organization, just in case someone from the top of the pyramid is watching us right now.
By djole381 (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
djole381
That's right. We all LOVE democracy. XD
By chiefone (SI Veteran Member) on May 05, 2011
chiefone
SirRoderick,

Show me ONE country where socialized healthcare works. It doesn't. And don't tell me Canada. My sister lives there had had to wait 6 months to get a MRI to scan her tumor, and another 6 months to get surgery. AND her husband still has to buy medical insurance!

A few years ago when she lived in the USA she was diagnosed with a brain tumor, and had it taken out - all within 6 days!

The survival rates of cancer are much higher in the US than anywhere else!

I don't support liberals because they support things like socialized healthcare, abortion, death panels and spending money we don't have.

FREE MARKET RULES!
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
FoolWolf
Thing is chiefone that Liberals usually want both models - a social lifeline for those that fail and bounce them back and a minimum sort of protection but also having a private funded way if you chose. Socialist way doesn't usually support the private way. Abortion isn't a question of political ideas as much as it is a religious and a women debate. The more free from oppression a country is, the more they speak about and are open to abortion. The same for personal hygiene and viral deceases for that matter...
Death panels - well..... let me phrase it like this: do you like that USA and China are the best buddies on this issue? Truly red and blue can kill with equal swag ;)
Free market rules, you and so does every system that we bow our heads to or raise or fist in the sky for, or for any ideal where old men can send younger generations to die for a strip of land... It is, will be - always our curse. We will never see things the same way.
I don't reject your ideas, there are merits in them. Can you say the same about mine?
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
FoolWolf
P.S Just wanted to add that the above post is not in any means meant as an attack or disregarding chiefone's political views - and if it is seen as that or this political stuff is either not allowed or plain boring - please remove it. D.S
By chiefone (SI Veteran Member) on May 05, 2011
chiefone
If people were perfect, then socialism would be the way to go. But we are flawed, and I think you will agree that most people will cheat, lie, and steal - even if they work for the government, or "the people".

The only people I can trust are myself, my family and some friends. I do not trust politicians with my health, money, or children. I believe the more people manage their own life, the better it will be - because they care about it more than anyone else.
=)
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
SirRoderick
@chiefone

For the best effect, read this out loud.

Countries with universal health care in Europe include Austria, Andorra, Belarus, BELGIUM (i.e, me), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom

And it works in (almost) all of them. Now are you trying to tell me that the worlds most powerful country and economy can't join that (huge) list, which comprises just about every civilised country?

Irrational.
By djole381 (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
djole381
I'm from Serbia and this system works really well here.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
SirRoderick
Of course it does. The only places it doesn't are in dictatorships and kleptocracies.

...and somehow APPARENTLY, the US.
By djole381 (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
djole381
Well you just have to watch "Sicko" to see what's US health care system like.
By bosnian_dragon (SI Core) on May 05, 2011
bosnian_dragon
@Djole - That movie is one of the best documentaries I've watched. I think that US citizens didn't feel our Ex-yugoslav socialism which was the only socialism that was progressive in the past, but the western influence was far bigger than we could handle.
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 05, 2011
PowerJack
Why is Portugal (my country) there?

The fad nowadays is medical errors.
By Eversor (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
Eversor
@ Roderick. IF the health bill isn't removed or changed by 2014, then it will be mandatory that all US citzens have Health Insurance.
By Eversor (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
Eversor
@ Roderick. IF the health bill isn't removed or changed by 2014, then it will be mandatory that all US citzens have Health Insurance or face fines. Hows that for Health care that works. Also, another matter of the Health Bill is a system that unless your Insurance can pay for what you need, even if you have the money to do it other your self, you can't get your health care. It's a totally liberal system that reeks of government trying to inch its way torward total control of its people.
By chiefone (SI Veteran Member) on May 06, 2011
chiefone
Today many politicians endorse establishing a national healthcare system. It would provide healthcare to many needy children and families who cannot afford it and eliminate the corrupt private healthcare sector. Annette Fuentes, appearing in USA Today asks, "What's wrong with such a step?"
There are numerous concerns associated with moving to a nationalized healthcare plan. A few of these concerns are: quality of healthcare, how it will be funded, and corruption in the system.
The most fundamental problem with nationalized healthcare is that there will be a monopoly. This will seriously affect the quality of services provided. France, Canada, the U.K. and New Zealand all have a nationalized healthcare plan, and yet they receive inferior healthcare compared to the United States. According to the book Lives at Risk: Single-Payer National Health Insurance Around the World: "In the U.S., the mortality ratio - the percentage of people with the disease who die from it - is 25%. The breast cancer mortality ratios for Canada, the U.K. and New Zealand are 28%, 46% and 46% respectively. The U.S. prostate cancer mortality ratio is only 19%. In Canada, it's 25%, in France, it's 49% - and in the U.K., over half - 57% - of men diagnosed with prostate cancer die from it" (Goodman 72-73).
This new form of medical care would be free, right? Most certainly not.
Traditionally, counties with universal healthcare pay for the services with income tax. The income tax rate in France is 58% (Income Tax in France) for earning €77,334 or approximately $176,000 a year. So, if you earned $176,000 a year before taxes in France, you would take home the small sum of $73,000 a year. In contrast, the income tax in America, if you earn $176,000, is only 28% (Corporate and Individual Tax Rates), less than half of what it is in France. This means in the USA you would pay $49,000 in taxes, and take home $127,000. So the "free" healthcare in France would cost you an astounding $54,000 a year!
Implementing a universal healthcare plan would also introduce numerous expenditures, including a tamper proof ID, higher overhead, and more fraud. In New York, fraud through Medicare alone costs $4.4 Billion dollars a year, and socialized healthcare would only increase this number astronomically (Grinch).
I feel a great sadness when socialized healthcare is touted as the solution to all of our problems. Instead, it would be creating a bigger problem by calling for a bigger, more intrusive, socialistic government. It should never be considered as a viable alternative to private healthcare. If the world was a perfect place, socialized healthcare would work, but it is not, and never will be.





Works Cited:

“Corporate and Individual Tax Rates.” smbiz.com. 15 October 2008


Gingrich, Newt. Real Change: From the World That Fails to the World That Works.
Washington DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc. 2008

Goodman, Musgrave, and Herrick. Lives at Risk: Single-Payer National Health
Insurance Around the World. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. 2004

“Income Tax in France.” Howtobooks.co.uk. 15 October 2008.
By chiefone (SI Veteran Member) on May 06, 2011
chiefone
Socialized health care worked out well for Greece. I mean its not like they have riots or massive debts they can never repay. =)
By Eversor (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
Eversor
That's the spirit.
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
FoolWolf
Greek is also one of the most corrupt places in EU, I guess we could try and argue how well your system worked in the voting of Bush in Florida state? Also, it wasn't the health care system that broke the Greece economy - corrupt politicians that didn't follow the system were to blame. You don't have corrupt politicians in US....?
Look close enough and you will find problems everywhere...

The talk about money is only good as long as you are happy, healthy, have education, etc. I live in Sweden - we are on the top 5 countries in the world I think (we were but have had massive tax reduction last years) but healthcare is free, education is free, child care is free. There are now also private corporations in all of the above - you can chose. Here you are not fined - I didn't know that about the US proposal - if you don't have any insurances - because you don't have to bother. You feel sick? You go to a hospital and they check you out.
Sure there are flaws - and that is because even the state owned hospitals have to show profit and lower costs - and that means that people that don't care about the business but about the numbers - money - decides.
Then the Swedish people vote - and then we change the sitting politicians that doesn't do well by the people.

One could of course argue that if you never become sick - you pay for others - but truly - show me the person that can walk by people crying for help - and you have shown me a person that doesn't deserve anything in kind! That should be apparent to you guys from US - you are the ones who give the most on a private base to people in need for loads of different reasons. In Sweden - part of the tax goes to help countries and people in need. If we want to do charity - we can give even more and most do.

I'm not saying that we are perfect - far from it - but I don't think either system is good enough. A mix of everything with choices but also a security net for those in the very bottom. To help people bounce off from illness, unemployment personal tragedies etc. is a cost efficient way to handle people humanly also in a long term economic and welfare point of view.
you want numbers? The Nordic countries all have socialised welfare - lowest birth-death in the world and are about the best countries handling with heart diseases and cancer.

As always - with respect - even though words may sound crude and harsh.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
SirRoderick
FoolWolf beat me to it.
By djole381 (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
djole381
OK guys, I think it's time to end this discussion here and take it somewhere else like PM's, MSN or something different.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
SirRoderick
Agreed.
By Eversor (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
Eversor
@ djole381. Unless the administrators say so, it really don't matter.
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
FoolWolf
I think we have come slightly off topic as djole mentions ;) Only slightly - perhaps we should kick up a discussion in the forums? Or just head back to discuss gaming ;)
By bosnian_dragon (SI Core) on May 06, 2011
bosnian_dragon
I was wondering are these comments compatible with the competition? :p
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
FoolWolf
They sure aren't spam quality I would say - I don't care if they are struck out or not - the discussion has been interesting IMO. :)
By bosnian_dragon (SI Core) on May 06, 2011
bosnian_dragon
I was just joking, I actually read every comment and I must admit that there were some good points made. I must say that I support socialist healthcare with a strong laws that prohibit corruption. I will not say any examples because that would take us even deeper into the matter :D
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 06, 2011
FoolWolf
You are a wise person indeed bosnian_dragon ;)
I fear however that no system will remove corruption completely - but it is up to everyone to fight it as best as we can.
By chiefone (SI Veteran Member) on May 06, 2011
chiefone
Good discussion guys! =)
By bosnian_dragon (SI Core) on May 06, 2011
bosnian_dragon
I know that corruption can't be totally controlled, but in many cases it can be stopped before happening. It sounds idilic, but if you have a healthy society (and by that I mean good educational system, fair treatment by laws and good role-models in your society) then you can expect people to be less corrupt inside of them, and therefore you'd have much less need for lobbying and similar illegal acts. Of course, in USA corruption is given another label called "Lobby" which is an amnesty word for bribing, but that's another topic.
By bosnian_dragon (SI Core) on May 06, 2011
bosnian_dragon
P.S. And I think that state-controlled healthcare isn't necessarily low-budget and low-maintained because people are those who vote for politicians and they can choose who will control the ministry of health. That is why I believe that social democracy is the best solution for current problems in the world. Any other form of government in my humble opinion is a worse solution.
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 07, 2011
PowerJack
"I fear however that no system will remove corruption completely"

How about you mess up your country you die.

Death is such a wonderful thing but people forget about it sometimes.

I miss the good old days with the fights to death, the decapitations, firing squads & my favorites hangings & electric chairs.

Just imagine the cleaning that would follow...

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!

^.^
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 07, 2011
FoolWolf
Hmm,Powerjack - there is only one country that under a very brief period have had any effect of threatening with a death penalty - Hong Kong colony made any robbery made with a firearm punishable by death. That changed to robberies with axes, swords knives etc - but the number of firearms drastically lessened - for a period of time.
China and US have the death penalty and they also have a rather huge crime rates.
You seem to forget "that death is light like a feather, duty heavy as a mountain - and that even a cornered rat will fight a lion".
Also, you can take the entire middle east that is in uprising against dictators. Death is nothing when you have had enough.

Also - who are going to kill the corrupt? The ones initiating the French revolution were later put to the block themselves...
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 07, 2011
PowerJack
So, your point being?

If every corrupt person kicked the bucked just like that would be nice for 2 reasons.
1- Less corruption.
2- Less people.

See its a win-win scenario, overpopulation has always been a problem right.

^.^
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 07, 2011
FoolWolf
I fear you haven't studied conflict theories to fully see the win win here. What my point was is that in absurd, there would be one person left since absolute power corrupts absolutely...
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 08, 2011
PowerJack
I was mainly just messing with you but the truth is I'm looking forward to the END OF THE WORLD!!!

But then again who isn't.
^.^
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 08, 2011
SirRoderick
I personally currently have 5 plans to achieve just that. I'm working on plan 6 ATM, but it is surprisingly difficult to genetically engineer lethal virusses into a flying kangaroo's tail stinger.
By bosnian_dragon (SI Core) on May 08, 2011
bosnian_dragon
Overpopulation is not a problem. The planet is a vast place suitable for many more billions of people. The main problem are the corporations who exploit some countries in order to increase profits in other countries. If corporations die, I think that will be the best thing for mankind.
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 08, 2011
PowerJack
LOL, good one Roderick.
By Revan (SI Elite) on May 08, 2011
Revan
HOLY CRAP! What do politics have to do with foul language in a Mortal Kombat game?!?
You guys need to seriously put that up a blog or something. :S
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on May 09, 2011
FoolWolf
We were just breaking an OT record or something... I think we hit rock bottom when we the entire "How to end mankind" theme started...
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on May 09, 2011
SirRoderick
While we are breaking the OT record:
I just have to say this: Overpopulation = most likely scenario of collapse of civilization.

Many regions are already running out of water and food to go around. Vast areas of the planet NEED to be reserved to sustain ecosystems, provide farmland, etc.

I'm not saying it's beyonf saving right now, but I actually REMEMBER reading about the 6th Billionth person being born. I'm 20 years old, I was 9 I think. In 2009 we were up to 6,775,235,700.

That's 775,235,700 people in ten years.

I'm sorry but you can't deny that is WAY too fast.
By bosnian_dragon (SI Core) on May 09, 2011
bosnian_dragon
Just for the record, according to the UN, 6 billionth baby was born in Sarajevo, the capital city of my country :D

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/472704.stm
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 10, 2011
PowerJack
We need a new WORLD WAR!!!

Or something like the movie 2012.

^.^
By Revan (SI Elite) on May 10, 2011
Revan
Hmmm, I wonder if another flood would wipe out all the mosquitoes?
By chiefone (SI Veteran Member) on May 11, 2011
chiefone
Everyone could live in the state of texas - with the population density of new york, and leave the rest of the world for the long tailed, blue whiskered, fat-snouted, water rats and other such endangered creatures.

If you are worried about overpopulation, consider committing suicide to save mankind.
By PowerJack (SI Elite) on May 11, 2011
PowerJack
Once I get a nuke I'll probably will.

^.^
By bosnian_dragon (SI Core) on May 11, 2011
bosnian_dragon
Hahah chiefone, good said!