357

Xbox Player Gets Banned for 1 Year After Recording Baldur's Gate 3 Scenes (gamerant.com)

submitted 6 months ago by Clbull@lemmy.world to c/games@lemmy.world

66 comments fedilink hide all child comments

An Xbox player was given a year-long ban for recording nude scenes in Baldur's Gate 3.

Any clips you record on your Xbox are uploaded to Microsoft's servers by default and may be automatically flagged as explicit content, as /u/Daddy-Vegas on Reddit found out when he automatically received a combined 390 day (4+21+365) suspension from Xbox Live for three clips he recorded.

His first appeal was apparently rejected, but subsequent appeals led to his ban being lifted after the gaming press picked up the story.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 125 points 6 months ago

Still gets me that in GTA:San Andreas they had hours and hours of non-stop killing and gore - but it was a a low-poly blurred sex scene that was only available if you manually cracked the game files that made it go down in infamy.

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 56 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Hillary Clinton literally promoted a fucking dumb fucking law in response to the Hot Coffee mod, along with "blue dog democrat" (read: Not So Secret Republican) Joe Lieberman. Thankfully the bill failed.

Leiberman literally used his votes to stand in the way of progress. He's literally why we don't have a Public Option for the ACA, which is the only thing that would have made the ACA actually worthwhile.

People to this day still lose their shit over the 2016 election and don't understand why people hated Hillary Clinton and blamed it all on a "right wing propaganda machine."

I guess they entirely forgot the absolutely fuck stupid shit she did in congress, like this.

This kind of shit showed her to be not only out of touch, but completely misunderstanding how unused code on a gaming console was such an unlikely thing to be leaked to kids to begin with. In her own dumbshit words, Hot Coffee was a "nothingburger."

Sorry for the derail, I just always kind of feel like people forgot about this entirely.

[-] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 59 points 6 months ago

"People to this day still lose their shit over the 2016 election and don't understand why people hated Hillary Clinton and blamed it all on a "right wing propaganda machine.""

I voted for Hillary in the general because fucking obviously. But she was such an arrogant shit-head through the whole election. I remember watching her boastfully declare that she wouldn't listen to Bernie supporters because she didn't need their vote. She's like the anti-Biden. That's when I started to be worried that she would let Trump win. Fuck her. She's out of touch and thinks it's a virtue.

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 33 points 6 months ago

Exactly. Wasn't about to vote for a dipshit like Trump, but she was being downright abusive to Democratic voters.

She promoted Trump with her "pied piper" strategy because she was so sure he would be the easiest to beat in the general election.

Then she won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College in a bunch of states she didn't campaign in and people on her campaign (including her own husband) had argued she needed to go do stump speeches in those states.

She absolutely thought it was "her turn" and that the DNC owed her for essentially bailing them out when they were broke.

In court, the DNC didn't even argue that they didn't put their finger on the scale for Clinton, they argued it was legal for them to do that because the DNC is a private club, which means they make their own rules, and if they break their own rules, the only people they have to answer to is themselves.

Later in the hearing, attorneys representing the DNC claim that the Democratic National Committee would be well within their rights to “go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way.”

What's that old saying about if the facts aren't on your side, argue the law, if the law isn't on your side, argue the facts, and if neither is on your side pound the table and yell?

The DNC never tried to make the argument that they didn't put their finger on the scale for Hillary Clinton because they would have been found to have definitely done so during discovery proceedings.

The facts weren't on their side so they argued the law, which is that "We're a private club, so NYEAH. Go fuck yourself."

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 17 points 6 months ago

The DNC let trump win. They'd rather lose and hand the country over to a psychopathic narcissist, with 7 bankruptcies, 26 open sexual assault cases against him, a history of fraud, and a recorded declaration of his sexual assault, than win with Bernie. Democrats really need to reflect on the reality of that scenario. The Democratic National Convention would rather have a deranged republican in office than a Democrat with a few socialist ideas. That says a lot about what their real agenda is. All the hot button topics they drone on about are distractions.

[-] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

I voted for Bernie. The DNC absolutely supported Hillary in the same way that they almost always support incumbents.

Having said that, the polls were favorable to Bernie. There are a lot of moderate and conservative Democrats, and they absolutely come out to vote.

Bernie lost the primary and would have lost to Trump in the general the moment Trump ramped up the socialist messaging. And unlike some others like Elizabeth Warren, Bernie does not hide from the socialist label. He embraces it, for better or worse.

It doesn't make me feel better about Hillary. But that's who Democrats chose.

[-] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Democrats are so terrified of being labeled socialist, they refuse to consider the fact that most Americans support socialist democratic policies in all but name.

Bernie lost the primary thanks to DNC antagonism, but he would have destroyed Trump. He was the only one who could have. His election events dwarfed Hillary's, rivaled Trump's, and kept growing. Donny was so terrified of Bernie that he refused to engage with, and barely ever mentioned him.

[-] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Donald Trump constantly talked up Bernie because he knew it create animosity and he wouldn't actually win. I love Bernie and I support him, his supporters are very passionate and they show up. But moderates are the majority of the Democratic party and they're harder to convince. It doesn't matter if your supporters are more passionate if the casuals don't like the brand.

Trump was pretty unpopular amongst casuals, there are many candidates who could have beaten him. Hillary could have beaten Trump if she had taken the election seriously. Biden too. Maybe Bernie could have as well. But the whole dynamic would have changed if Trump was antagonistic against him instead of Hillary.

[-] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

It has been a long time since 2016, and I have yet to see mainstream Democrats own up to their own faults in the loss. I'll certainly admit it was close, but they are still as much in denial about Bernie's chances as they were about their own. Their claim that Dems would have refused to vote for Bernie if he won the primary undermines their credibility when complaining about Bernie voters not showing up.

Trump absolutely did not have the advantage on Bernie, had no idea how to handle him, and was terrified of him, which is why he didn't try.

[-] BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

i remember when she said she was so far ahead in the polls she didnt even think of trump

and tweeting a happy birthday future madam president to herself

hilarious

[-] BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee 5 points 5 months ago

one reporter straight up lied and said the hot coffee mod was a multiplayer game where whoever rapes the most people wins

its not multiplayer, and all sex is consensual. what a bonehead

[-] Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee -4 points 6 months ago

The pearl clutching “think of the CHILDREN” in the media was ridiculous, like you said it is a thoroughly violent and gory game. It was a legitimate legal issue for Take2, Rockstar, and the ERSB however. The ESRB is a voluntary ratings organization like the MPAA, who work with publishers and retailers to provide consumers with accurate info.

Rockstar lied on the ESRB paperwork and shipped the CD with content that wasn’t disclosed. Irregardless if it required a crack or not, that is what was delivered, and that was a big deal. Huge breach of contract by Rockstar and/or Take2, and loss of trust from retailers towards ESRB ratings.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 30 points 6 months ago

You can literally hire hookers, fuck them, then beat them to death and take your money back. But showing some skin is the issue? What an odd society we have.

[-] Nipah@kbin.social 10 points 6 months ago

When I used to work at a video game store, I used to try and dissuade parents from buying their 10 year old GTA 3/VC.

"So you can just walk down the street and shoot a random person, then when the cops show up, you can just shoot all of them as well."

Oh, well they probably see worse things on TV!

"Uh huh... you can also pick up a hooker, drive to a secluded area, have sex with them, pay them, and then run them over when they leave to get your money back."

Wait, it also has sex?!

[-] Cybersteel@lemmy.world -4 points 5 months ago

I think it's because violence is commonplace in everyday life, a part of human nature, from wars to gin violence but icky weird sex stuff is not.

[-] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

Wouldn't it be the opposite? I'd think most people are more likely to have had sex than having killed a person. Maybe it's because they think sexual content might actually lead kids to want to have sex.

Nevermind that these games are not rated for children to begin with, so who is buying it for them?