Spore + Porn = Sporn
Spore + Porn = Sporn
July 31, 2008
Will Wright's Spore, due for a September 7th release, is one of most anticipated PC titles ever.
But, as CNN reports, some users of the Creature Creator utility, released last month, have built animals which are apparently intent on breeding. Or, at least coupling.
...Buried among the more wholesome attempts [at Spore creature creation] were two-legged dancing testicles, a "giant breast monster" and a four-legged, "phallic fornication machine," for starters...
For EA, the developer of "Spore," it's the downside to tapping into the booming user-generated content arena, which has made sites like YouTube, Flickr, MySpace, Facebook and Second Life so popular... Many of the popular user-generated content sites have faced similar challenges in trying to control obscene material...
The creatures are not just static. Users can create animated scenarios for the characters to engage in, some of which include sexually graphic acts.
When EA got word of the "Sporn" creations, it began working with YouTube to pull them down. Spore executive producer Lucy Bradshaw told CNN:
Whether it's modeling clay, dolls or crayons, a small number of people can be counted on to use it for something vulgar.
CNN also spoke to the "Spornmaster," a 37-year-old man who has created a number of reproductively equipped Sporn creatures:
I admit it is silly and juvenile, but I don't think there's anything perverted, vile or awful about it. If people find it offensive, they can simply not search for it online. No one is forcing anyone to see this content.
One Spore fan told CNN:
I consider this very similar to child pornography, at least to the extent of distributing the material to children.
GP: Buzzfeed has additional NSFW links...
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:48pm
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:42pm
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:40pm
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:39pm
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:34pm
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:32pm
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:26pm
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:25pm
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:22pm
Valdearg: @AE: And that's fine. Official "Church" functions are fine, despite the fact that it's discrimination, it's what I guess I would consider "acceptable" discrimination, despite the fact that I hate to use "acceptable" to define it.
Valdearg: @AE: And that's fine. Official "Church" functions are fine, despite the fact that it's discrimination, it's what I guess I would consider "acceptable" discrimination, despite the fact that I hate to use "acceptable" to define it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:21pm
Valdearg: What's stopping someone from working with the church to declare a Catholic Corporation, that would retain it's "right" to discriminate against non-Catholics?
Valdearg: What's stopping someone from working with the church to declare a Catholic Corporation, that would retain it's "right" to discriminate against non-Catholics?
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:20pm
Valdearg: Let me ask you this. What defines something as "catholic"? There are Catholic Schools, Churchs, Charities, and even law firms.
Valdearg: Let me ask you this. What defines something as "catholic"? There are Catholic Schools, Churchs, Charities, and even law firms.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:20pm
Andrew Eisen: Indeed. You can restrict the membership of your private club however you see fit. However, a business can't refuse to hire someone based on sexual orientation.
Andrew Eisen: Indeed. You can restrict the membership of your private club however you see fit. However, a business can't refuse to hire someone based on sexual orientation.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:20pm
gellymatos: Would you hire someone against gay rights for a position of leadership in a gay rights advocacy group?
gellymatos: Would you hire someone against gay rights for a position of leadership in a gay rights advocacy group?
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
One spore fan(18 year old Michael James from Calgary, Alberta according to CNN) is obviously a stupid twat then.
I bet its the overzealous twits like him who have been flaging any creature they don't like as obscene.
Sounds a little alike with some Deviantart users who report you if they think you are drawing porn, even if you are tagging you posts with mature tag, and even when there are real pictures more explicit than any dumb draw on Deviantart.
The cynical side of videogames (spanish only): http://thelostlevel.blogspot.com/ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com/
I think it's someone who a) probably doesn't understand what child porn is (distributing porn to children !+ child porn), and b) doesn't remember being anywhere from 5-12 (or 18 (or 45) for some). Not saying that EA shouldn't try to get this stuff out, but calling it child porn is beyond the pale, and probably more than a little insulting to victims of child porn.
Thanks for sourcing the "one spore fan" kid.
And agreed. idiot kid is idiot.
The Giant cock monster had me falling of the chair.
How could someone compare this to child porn? Why so scared of a fake penis? It's not real, you don't have to watch it, make it or even buy it when it comes out. Regardless, I can see why EA's scared. It might hurt sales. Can't have that happen, now can we, EA? Might upset your balance in trying to conquer the world.
Why so serious?
Teehee, your post said "Why so.." and I just thought of that. On another note...anyone wanna see a magic trick?
Yeah... it might hurt sales. EA is a company, there job is to make sure profits are high. They may also be trying to avoid people demanding that the game be rerated for the children.
The game won't sell, anyway. It will pirate like crazy, but it won't sell. EA is using the same (inherently irredeemably flawed) distribution model they used for Mass Effect.
I think this is a big fat duh. I think the Spornmaster and the Spore executive producer got it right. If you give the masses any molding tools, someone will make silly things, and just because they make some slightly immature things, it isn't meant to offend, and if you are offended, don't look at it.
COMMON SENSE FTW
Of course, the truly amusing (or disturbing for EA) part is if the game lives up to it's promise of populating it's universe with user generated creatures taken randomly from other people's games. But then I'm not keeping up too close with Spore, so they may have removed that feature already. =)
It is the first thing I thought of when they made thier big press release in magazines earlier this year... "Great, I'm going to be encountering giant penises or something from some loser's game that got spread across the universe." ;)
Its optional
Import nothing
Import Friends
Import everything.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....
Awesome, now what is wrong with the retard comapring this to child porn?
It is pretty much like the ending credits of superbad... you know the notebook with some pictures...
I really don't see how it would hurt sales... if anything this will give them free publicity and MORE sales...
Cue Jack Thompson lawsuit in 3....2.....1......
Isn't he being disbarred?
He is not in his MIND...
The cynical side of videogames (spanish only): http://thelostlevel.blogspot.com/ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com/
...two-legged dancing testicles...
I have to admit, this made me laugh in the stupidest, 2nd grade way.
I can understand EA being concerned, the media tends to focus on the negative in games (see: this story), and from what little the public understands about them, it wouldn't be a stretch for Spore to be mislabeled in their eyes.
There are quite a few juvinile minded people out there. This goes along with a comic that PA made about the Tiger Woods golfer creator where you could upload your own photo. The first attempt by Gabe was to use a picture of his testicles. Then a picture of his cat.
Give enough people room to be "creative" and you will get people who can only "create" juvinile works like this.
E. Zachary Knight
http://www.editorialgames.com
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091
You say that like it's a bad thing.
I don't see how this is juvinile ... doesnt everyone dream of a world inhabited by large testicle monsters and boobies .... oh wait now that I have typed that that does sound childish ... but I would have to say its probably just as childish to be offended by such a thing as it is to create it.
The catch of it is like with the Elder Scrolls: Oblivion controversy. In that case, third party users created a skin for female characters that could have them totally naked. The game was re-evaluated, and given an M rating from a T rating. In this case, because there is user created content that graphically depicts human genitals and/or sexual acts the ESRB could be forced to label this M or AO.
Childishness is one thing, but consider the effects done the road before you dismiss it.
"The Good, the Bad, and Videogame"
Reviews on the best, worst, and controversial issues of Videogames.
gryphonosiris.blogspot.com/
Yep, no genitals, no nipples, not even any hair below the neck. They did have a belly button, but other than that were unformed skintones to fill in gaps in armor in place of the brown unremovable underwear you'd see if the character actually was naked.
In this case, because there is user created content that graphically depicts human genitals and/or sexual acts the ESRB could be forced to label this M or AO.
Hmm, last time I looked my penis didn't have legs.
If I were arguing the rating before the ESRB you can bet I'd be there with photos of anteaters, clams, barnacles...
There was a third party mod that unlocked a way to make all the female characters topless. The problem was that the topless texture was in the game to begin with. The ESRB re-reviewed the content and found, not was there the topless texture, but much more blood and gore than there was in the version they originally reviewed. This has NOTHING to do with user generated content and everything to do with what people decide to put in the games.
The lesson is, if you're going to remove content from a game, remove the whole thing and not just the way to activate it.
When I first started talking to people about Spore and the creature creator, a stunning number of them said:
"Everybody's going to make breast monsters and penis monsters."
Which, as we all know, really translates into:
"I'm going to make breast monsters and penis monsters."
Because the only way people like this get through the day is by convincing themselves that everyone else is just like them.
Personally, I'm not going to waste my time trying to animate a penis. I cannot think of anything interesting that might come of that. But all these other people are out there animating penises, and even though it's not particularly interesting, it still makes me giggle.
You're allowed to think it's funny, you know. Just because it's juvenile and immature doesn't mean it can't be funny. Here's one of my favorite jokes of all time:
Q: Why did the chicken cross the road?
A: Because it was on fire.
It's all well and good to think that it's stupid and a waste of time to animate a penis, but it's already been done, and these people weren't exactly going to be curing cancer anyway. If the best they can offer the world is a penis monster and a fart joke, why complain about it? Maybe one of them is a genius, and has animated the best penis monster that will ever be made. Maybe it will be in a museum of penis monsters, and artists will study his method of making penis monsters in accredited scholarly institutions.
It could happen. The vast majority of artists learn how to draw a penis from Michelangelo's David. That's the most famous penis in the world today. Even Ron Jeremy's isn't that famous.
The first thing I made on spore was a giant penis monster. But I DIDNT put it up to be shared. Likewise I bet most people did. Hell, I can just go look up some sporn and SHOW a great deal of people did, and in todays society alot of people CAN be called "everybody". When I say everybody I dont mean every single person in the world is gonna make sporn, but alot of people are. It is just a forgone conclusion, one that can be found simply by going to places like 4chan.
If I had the creature creator, I admit I probably would've made something silly or juvenile, because those are easier to create than something original, because I know what they look like. I wouldn't make all of my creations walking testicles, but a few would definatly be jokes.
As the man said, give any person building material and sooner or later you will end up with a willy. It's a fact of human nature.
Maybe posting them on YouTube was a bad idea in retrospect, but they weren't put there for the people who didn't find them funny.
I think it's pretty obvious what happened here: Will Wright was clearly inspired by Super Metroid sub-boss Spore Spawn to make an organic screw-simulator. Therefore, Samus Aran is guilty of corrupting our kids. I mean, look at what she did to that poor, innocent baby Metroid, all acting like a surrogate mother and then forkin' it over to the scientists in a tube. In a tube!
ps. has anyone told the media about Goatse yet?
---
The Mammon Industry
LOL At least it wasn't a series of tubes, or we'd all be in trouble ;)
Oh, and just wanted to ask, was there a single person outside of EA who, from the announcement of the creature creator, was surprised when this started happening? Just curious.
You know... you'd think that somebody would point out that you're supposed to be creating creatures that go on to evolve and develop.
How, pray tell, are they supposed to *do* that if they don't have....
Just as well they haven't seen the fuck slug yet! Heads may asplode.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqyxCwngvgk&watch_response
The guy who compared it to child porn is making a semantic error. Child porn is pornography featuring children. He means distributing porn to children... a whole different fish.
Not that that isn't a stupid charge either, but lets not take seriously such ignorance.
I thought the same thing when I first read those comments. It can't be child porn because there are no children in it. It's not even regular porn, more like freaky alien porn. And as we all know, distributing freaky alien porn to minors is not a crime.
The guy is just linking videogames = kids.
And of course, sex is forbidden knowledge gor children.
The cynical side of videogames (spanish only): http://thelostlevel.blogspot.com/ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com/
It is silly that I can have sex in Michigan at 16, but can't look at a PICTURE of a naked girl until I'm 18...or if any evidence of my sex is recorded, it's illegal
These may be crude and vulgar to some people, but its a persons choice to make these. When the game comes out they will probably just give the option to flag "offensive" looking creatures anyway.
This is also why the ESRB can't rate what happens online. So don't bother trying to make this game AO.
Maybe the best soultion is to make it illegal for anyone under 18 to go online.
Lol the penismonster had me laughing hard for about a min. And comparing this to child pornography, that's just missinformation on their part. Child pornagraphy is not when you show children porn or nudity. If we should compare spore to child pornagraphy then maybe it should be when they make a population of rape-beasts with children stuck at their genitalias at weird angles.
But i'd probly think that qualifies as pretty fun too.
And what are they going to do about it? Put a +18 tag on spore because some users can make sporn out of it, well then i think they should put a goddamn 18+ tag on papper and pens cause some users make hentai.
Maybe we should put freaking 18+ tags on our brains.
People like Fox and CNN should not be allowed to talk about video games. They never get it right.
I always knew that Spore's universe would be full of d***s
As someone who is endlessly amused by hentai, i find this spectacular.
One of my favorite hentai spoofs is this 'interview' with two hentai characters. The real life dynamic between the school girl and the tentacle monster is quite different than what you'd expect. Poor guy is totally brow beaten.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_15pwhMJjk
higher quality version:
http://blip.tv/file/390841?filename=SeattleUntimely-September21st2007The...
"I need to find myself a real squid"
"Endlessly amused"... Does that translate to "fapping constantly"?
I had the same thought...
Anyone surprised by Sporn has obviously not been on the internet very long.
Apparently children have genitals. This could also be construed as child porn. The world will not be safe until the groin area of all children is as smooth as a Barbie/Ken doll.
Does that mean we have to castrate children? A disturbing and painful thought.
There is a huge grey area between "regular" creations and "obcene" creations. Trying to censor them is wrong for all the same reasons censorship is wrong for all other forms of media.
Jeez! Honestly, I'm speechless. Just... Jeez!
I mean, just leave gamers alone! If we want to build huge phalluses in Spore, what's the harm? Honestly, I bet some folks keep their eyes shut tight while showering in case they notice that they have 'naughty bits'.
I'll just point to an xkcd comic...
imgs.xkcd.com/comics/penises.png
Enough said.
Porn on the internet?
This shocking piece of news is quite well flabbergasting to me. Such a phenomenon may require whole weeks of dedicated research to get to the very core of it and I in a self-less act to benefit science shall partake in this dangerous research.
You, sir, are a hero to us all.
First off any time you provide user creator tools then there will inevitably be some people who will, for various reasons, make sexual stuff. It's human nature.
Secondly I've seen a few of these "sporn" creatures and really they aren't that bad. Some of them are only sexual in the vaugest of senses. And it's not like they can do any sexual actions.
And lastly while it is immature, it's not anything new. We all have genitals of some kind. If your kid is playing spore then are probably already smart enough to be well aware of this.
Really it's not that big a deal.
QUICK! SOMEONE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THE HELL THIS STUFF IS LIKE CHILD PORN!
-Entertainment isn't the reason the world sucks. It's the reason we know the world sucks. For information on games and psychology, look up: Jonathan Freedman(2002)Block & Crain(2007)Grand Theft Childhood, by Harvard researchers Larry Kutner&Cheryl Olson
Why are people so offended by boobs and penises? I mean, half the population of the world has a penis and I'd wager that the entire population has seen one at some time in their life. As for boobs and nipples - the entire population of the world has breasts - what's the big deal?
The big deal is these idiots consider any body part that has a reproductive purpose is filthy and dirty. They consider our greatest expressions of love and lust to be obscene and these acts for any other reason than reproduction to be a crime.
Basically they are christians, and christians are ALWAYS looking for an excuse to bitch.
Basically they are religious, and many religious groups are ALWAYS looking for an excuse to bitch.
Fixed.
Well I guess we have no choice but to kill everyone who has nipples and/or genitals. For the children...damnit.
-Entertainment isn't the reason the world sucks. It's the reason we know the world sucks. For information on games and psychology, look up: Jonathan Freedman(2002)Block & Crain(2007)Grand Theft Childhood, by Harvard researchers Larry Kutner&Cheryl Olson
How the fuck are testicles and jiggling breasts obscene?!
This is the reason why so many kids have such insecurities of themselves, I for one blame the media!
PEDOBEAR SPORE NO!
Did anyone seriously expect that this wasn't going to happen? Seriously?
In other news, SomethingAwful ran a competition on Spore creatures a few weeks back, and a number of "sporn" monsters showed up.
Any forum with user generated content is bound to have a big penis in it, somewhere.
To whit:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/09/02/
Oh man, I laughed at that, probably more then I should have.
If they're upset with the creators of Spore, perhaps they should rethink their argument....
Providing a means whereby obscene user-generated content can be posted and seen by children.... sort of like THE INTERNET.
Stupid communists.
This isn't as big of deal as they are making it out to be. People over react. If parents are afraid of why content might be in the game, don't buy it.
Hmm, hey conservatives, if it offends you so much, don't look at it and fuck off