[QUOTE=Alienblue]
... but Christopher Walken will probably win, and that's when the Robots Take over (you DID know C.W. was a robot, of course!)[/QUOTE]
Alienblue, your posts are the bomb.
To comment on an earlier post in this thread: Yes, I'd be 100% OK with a game in which the premise is to topple the US government. Such an expression of speech is rightly protected.
However, I would most likely be highly critical of this hypothetical game. Remember, the right to free speech not only means that someone can create something highly controversial, but it also means I have the right to be very critical of it, if I choose. I think this aspect of free speech gets forgotten, i.e. the Dixie Chicks getting mad when their fans start smashing their records (after criticizing the government).
Another great example of this is is the Columbine RPG, which was removed from some indie games festival. The folks running that festival are getting slammed by the other contestents and in the game development world in general. As I see it, however, everybody was correct. The people running the convention have the right to refuse an entrant: its a private, non-government enterprise, so they should run it as they see fit. However, the other entrants, many of which removed their games in protest, obviously have the right to do that as well.
My comment regarding the Mercenaries game was simply expressing surprise that one would find taking out one of the most vile governments on earth to be a bad thing. Again, maybe the game does this in such a way that the regime is replaced by another communist totalitiarian regime, which of course would render the whole thing moot. Yeah, I'm sure actual North Korean citizens wouldn't be too thrilled about the game, but they literally don't know any better. Unless they escape into South Korea (via China), they really don't have any context (other than starving to death) about their situation. North Korea is a prison state, and my heart aches for those people.
-Rob