Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Rock Paper Shotgun)   Fox News takes on the next commie liberal nazi plot to indoctrinate your children into becoming environmentalists: A Sim City game from 2007   (rockpapershotgun.com) divider line 44
    More: Stupid, Sim City, environmentalists, plots, famine, playable characters, communists  
•       •       •

3857 clicks; posted to Geek » on 07 Sep 2011 at 12:55 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



44 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2011-09-07 12:12:59 PM  
could they be bigger shills for their big oil advertisers? or their ideological demagogue bosses?
 
2011-09-07 12:51:30 PM  
Look, I believe in nuclear energy, but saying it's "arguably the safest form of energy out there" is just stupid. Solar, geothermal, and wind power are all safer technologies.
 
2011-09-07 12:57:25 PM  
img511.imageshack.us

/ got to post this twice today.
 
2011-09-07 01:00:54 PM  

Sim Tree: [img511.imageshack.us image 275x142]

/ got to post this twice today.


Right Click -> Save As

/Tis quite awesome
 
2011-09-07 01:01:21 PM  
Sim City Societies was TERRIBLE. It was really, really terrible. Fox News should attack it just for being a buggy shiatfest.

/when your city consists of a bar, a hotel, an apartment, and 9 florists the way you power your buildings is irrelevant
 
2011-09-07 01:01:45 PM  

timujin: Solar, geothermal, and wind power are all safer technologies.


As is Hydroelectric
 
2011-09-07 01:08:49 PM  

timujin: Look, I believe in nuclear energy, but saying it's "arguably the safest form of energy out there" is just stupid. Solar, geothermal, and wind power are all safer technologies.


Indeed. And even if we stay within the nuclear tech, not all reactor types are equally safe, some are more prone to failure than others, and some produce worse waste than others
 
2011-09-07 01:09:29 PM  
FOXNEWS approved version of SimCity: http://willyoujoinus.com/energyville (new window)

environmentdebate.files.wordpress.com

"It seems that whatever combination of energy sources you click and drag onto your scenario, it is impossible to achieve more than 88% of the city's energy requirements without using oil. There's no facility to change the city's infrastructure, so you're stuck with planes and private cars as modes of transport, which require petroleum. The objective of this "game" is to demonstrate the continuing importance of petroleum and the impossibility of achieving independence from oil. Which is pretty much what you'd expect from an oil company."
 
2011-09-07 01:10:04 PM  

the_sidewinder: timujin: Look, I believe in nuclear energy, but saying it's "arguably the safest form of energy out there" is just stupid. Solar, geothermal, and wind power are all safer technologies.

Indeed. And even if we stay within the nuclear tech, not all reactor types are equally safe, some are more prone to failure than others, and some produce worse waste than others


Moreso when you consider we're still using design documents from the 60's and 70's if I remember correctly.
 
2011-09-07 01:11:45 PM  
I discovered recently that SimCity 4 will no longer run on my computer since I upgraded to Lion.

I also realized that SimCity 4 was released in 2003. Eight years ago.

We need a new SimCity. Come on, already.

/no, Societies doesn't count
 
2011-09-07 01:23:08 PM  
I can't wait to hear what Fox News thinks of those hippie socialist communes known as "arcologies."
 
2011-09-07 01:24:40 PM  
Wait til they get a hold of The Sims
static.gamesradar.com
/hot like girl on girl video game soft core porn
 
2011-09-07 01:25:01 PM  
Try CitiesXL.

It's not quite as good as SC4, but it sure is trying. Bonus: shapable roads - no grids in my city, and 'fill' parks to fill in unzoned clusterfark areas into something useful.
 
2011-09-07 01:26:27 PM  

Sim Tree: [img511.imageshack.us image 275x142]

/ got to post this twice today.


Makes me laugh every time I see it!
 
2011-09-07 01:26:46 PM  

timujin: Look, I believe in nuclear energy, but saying it's "arguably the safest form of energy out there" is just stupid. Solar, geothermal, and wind power are all safer technologies.


This comment floored me. I'm not anti-nuclear, but in light of both Fukushima, and the subsequent report of the vulnerability to catastrophe with US reactors, it's not only a bold thing to say, it's incredibly nearsighted.
 
2011-09-07 01:30:10 PM  
Oh my God, did Sim City Societies suck. I went and bought a new farking computer for that game.

Now, Sim City 4 is a game that has taken a fairly large portion of my life.
 
2011-09-07 01:32:09 PM  

EatCritAndDie: Try CitiesXL.

It's not quite as good as SC4, but it sure is trying. Bonus: shapable roads - no grids in my city, and 'fill' parks to fill in unzoned clusterfark areas into something useful.


I beta'd it. Lots of really cool concepts... execution just sucked out loud.
 
2011-09-07 01:36:56 PM  

Doc Daneeka: on, already.

/no, Societies doesn't count


I think there's a reason they haven't made another, and it's because there's nowhere new to go with a new version that isn't just even more insane micromanagement that the one from 2003 required. I fired SC4 back up last year after a looooong hiatus. Man, is that freaking game buggy. Spent some time reading about how to tweak Windows Compatibility Mode settings and it helped a bit, but i felt like I could shoot Will Wright in the balls for allowing EA to come out with such a POS when one of my biggest, coolest cities got corrupted during a save and turned into a big black hole on a region with like 5 million people. I just couldn't put up with it after that.
 
2011-09-07 01:39:23 PM  
t3.gstatic.com

t1.gstatic.com

Should have listened to Dr. Wright.

/Just for bonus:
t2.gstatic.com
 
2011-09-07 01:40:51 PM  
I loved societies... but it wasn't Sim City. It was something else.

I'd kill for a 2011 version of Sim City 2000.
 
2011-09-07 01:44:23 PM  
News: Video Games - Are they too violent?
Fox News: Video Games - What is this hippie crap? I just want to shoot foreigners from behind chest-high walls
 
2011-09-07 01:44:54 PM  

Genju: [t3.gstatic.com image 259x194]

[t1.gstatic.com image 204x178]

Should have listened to Dr. Wright.

/Just for bonus:
[t2.gstatic.com image 220x113]


That last picture, so awesome.
 
2011-09-07 01:57:26 PM  
FTFAV:
"But at the end of the day, parents don't really know what's in these video games, so they send them to play SimCity, and they're learning these lessons that might not be what the parents want their kids to learn."

"Eaxactly!"

Seriously? I 'get it' if this were about sex, if they were complaining about language, Hell even violence, but being environmentally conscious is a message that "parents might not want their kids to learn"? What a bunch of morons... Even IF global warming is a big hoax, even IF the EPA is nothing but a "job killer", and even IF the tree huggers just want to take all your rights away, being environmentally conscious should NEVER be seen as a "bad" thing.

These guys a re a couple of tools. They really need to just wander off together, have a quick little one-two on each other's wangs and forget the whole thing.
 
2011-09-07 02:02:29 PM  
Some of the "green" games are pretty crappy.

EcoTycoon was AWFUL. Got it as a gift.

Give me SimAnt in glorious surround sound and add a 1st person perspective ant attack mode.
 
2011-09-07 02:22:20 PM  

meat0918: Some of the "green" games are pretty crappy.

EcoTycoon was AWFUL. Got it as a gift.

Give me SimAnt in glorious surround sound and add a 1st person perspective ant attack mode.


Imagine the scope of game modern day systems could bear for a Sim Ant remake. It could be glorious.

Also, Sim Copter could be AMAZING.
 
2011-09-07 02:25:35 PM  
Therefor, go out and buy MW or COD and kill some towel-heads for the good of your country.
 
2011-09-07 02:25:58 PM  

StopLurkListen: FOXNEWS approved version of SimCity: http://willyoujoinus.com/energyville (new window)


Haha, wow, yeah that's pathetic.
"WARNING! OIL SUCKS IS LOW ON FUELS. Although you've successfully brought oil sucks's electricity grid to full capacity, you still need to add fuels to power a portion of your city's airplanes, vehicles, mass transit and factories."

Talk about self-promotion. Farking oil companies can ebod
 
2011-09-07 02:27:13 PM  

EatCritAndDie: Try CitiesXL.

It's not quite as good as SC4, but it sure is trying. Bonus: shapable roads - no grids in my city, and 'fill' parks to fill in unzoned clusterfark areas into something useful.



Yes, this game had a lot of features I felt were a large improvement over the SC games. I also liked the globe where you could pick where to build your city. Only issue I had is that it is very inefficient with resources which leads to performance hits on larger cities. even with a beast computer.
 
2011-09-07 02:38:34 PM  

Hobodeluxe: could they be bigger shills for their big oil advertisers? or their ideological demagogue bosses?


Shut your face and go buy some GOLD!
 
2011-09-07 03:03:37 PM  

Mikey1969: Even IF global warming is a big hoax, even IF the EPA is nothing but a "job killer", and even IF the tree huggers just want to take all your rights away, being environmentally conscious should NEVER be seen as a "bad" thing.


greenupgrader.com

/image is hot
 
2011-09-07 03:07:51 PM  

timujin: Look, I believe in nuclear energy, but saying it's "arguably the safest form of energy out there" is just stupid. Solar, geothermal, and wind power are all safer technologies.


safer to whom?
ducks and bees would like a word with you.
 
2011-09-07 03:32:52 PM  
"Nuclear energy is arguably the safest form of energy out there"

They should harness the power of that guy's skills to keep a straight face after saying that.
 
2011-09-07 03:35:23 PM  

Sangi: Mikey1969: Even IF global warming is a big hoax, even IF the EPA is nothing but a "job killer", and even IF the tree huggers just want to take all your rights away, being environmentally conscious should NEVER be seen as a "bad" thing.

[greenupgrader.com image 600x401]

/image is hot


SO effin' funny... :-)

Thanks!
 
2011-09-07 03:40:55 PM  
Thanks. I pulled it from a politics tab thread a few weeks ago. It pretty much sums up the whole global warming "debate" for me.
 
2011-09-07 03:44:59 PM  

Bukharin: timujin: Look, I believe in nuclear energy, but saying it's "arguably the safest form of energy out there" is just stupid. Solar, geothermal, and wind power are all safer technologies.

safer to whom?
ducks and bees would like a word with you.


Safer to everyone, if a nuclear plant goes then it'll be bad for the ducks and bees as well.

/how are bees affected?
//the duck thing apparently only concerns duck hunters
///what impact is there on ducks? How many are affected each year?
 
2011-09-07 04:06:50 PM  
I liked this comment:

Umm how is cod a right wing conspiracy by definition right and left wing refer the layout of the british parliament. Those who are proponents of communism socialism etc sit on the left, while proponents of fascism, and dictatorship sit on the right. The American "right-wing" are people who prefer less government and thus would sit in the middle of the british parliament. (btw hitler wasn't rightwing the only difference between nazism and communism was that communism was created by Karl Marx who was born a Jew, Hitler despising Jews beleived that this corrupted communism and as a result he created Nazism. (paraphrased from Mein Kampf)

So point 1 is wrong - when looking towards the speaker the current government is on the left, and the opposition on the right. This changes fairly regularly, so there is no way the term comes from the current UK parliament setup (a quick google suggests it originates from pre-revolutionary French government practises). He then seems to ignore liberal and conservatives which make up more of the left and right wings for most of history (and currently), and also inserts proponents of communism and dictatorship which rarely have much in the way of democratic representation (even where you have democratically elected self described communist party members in some places, they are usually much more socialist in practise than communist). True Fascists (even in the broader sense) rarely are a major feature of the right wing in a democracy either - except sometimes as fringe ultranationalist type parties, and even counting those as fascist even if they have some of the trappings is dubious.

Then he suggests American "right wingers" would sit in the middle of the British parliament, presumably on the floor somewhere, and that want "less government", which suggests American "right wingers" haven't voted Republican for decades given the bulk of government spending increases has come from the Republican side for the last few decades.

Next he asserts Hitler wasn't right wing (presumably due to an assumption of the logical fallacy that if Hitler likes dogs, liking dogs is thus a bad thing and makes you evil, and by analogy if you are right wing and don't want to be like Hitler, then Hitler must not have been right wing), and that Nazism and Communism are effectively identical to each other. Now while it is clear that all forms of absolutist/dictatorial government must have a number of commonalities - if one (or a few) people have control of an entire country then we can assume there will be at least a significant minority actively opposed to this, so large scale imprisonment or worse of political opponents is almost certain, the media is likely to be heavily censored or completely controlled, they are likely to start wars to provide a common enemy to distract the populace with (arguably a feature of all governments throughout history), and either control or regularly purge the military to protect against a military coup, etc. Given that it is always easy to try and make a case like this, but you barely have to scratch the surface of the two systems in practise to know there wasn't exactly a lot in common between them apart from the minimal set of commonalities you would expect to find - especially if you bring Marx into the equation and claim to be discussing what he described - a utopian vision of workers slowly realising they are the key engine of the economy and thus coming to run things in some anarchic community organisation type way, as opposed to the actual existing Communism - basically a fairly generic populist dictatorship with only a couple of distinctive features such as a very heavily state ordered economy, which could probably be argued to be almost exactly the opposite to what Marx seemed to be envisaging.
 
2011-09-07 04:08:55 PM  

xria: I liked this comment:

Umm how is cod a right wing conspiracy by definition right and left wing refer the layout of the british parliament. Those who are proponents of communism socialism etc sit on the left, while proponents of fascism, and dictatorship sit on the right. The American "right-wing" are people who prefer less government and thus would sit in the middle of the british parliament. (btw hitler wasn't rightwing the only difference between nazism and communism was that communism was created by Karl Marx who was born a Jew, Hitler despising Jews beleived that this corrupted communism and as a result he created Nazism. (paraphrased from Mein Kampf)

So point 1 is wrong - when looking towards the speaker the current government is on the left, and the opposition on the right. This changes fairly regularly, so there is no way the term comes from the current UK parliament setup (a quick google suggests it originates from pre-revolutionary French government practises). He then seems to ignore liberal and conservatives which make up more of the left and right wings for most of history (and currently), and also inserts proponents of communism and dictatorship which rarely have much in the way of democratic representation (even where you have democratically elected self described communist party members in some places, they are usually much more socialist in practise than communist). True Fascists (even in the broader sense) rarely are a major feature of the right wing in a democracy either - except sometimes as fringe ultranationalist type parties, and even counting those as fascist even if they have some of the trappings is dubious.

Then he suggests American "right wingers" would sit in the middle of the British parliament, presumably on the floor somewhere, and that want "less government", which suggests American "right wingers" haven't voted Republican for decades given the bulk of government spending increases has come from the Republican side for the last few decades.

Next he asserts Hitler wasn't right wing (presumably due to an assumption of the logical fallacy that if Hitler likes dogs, liking dogs is thus a bad thing and makes you evil, and by analogy if you are right wing and don't want to be like Hitler, then Hitler must not have been right wing), and that Nazism and Communism are effectively identical to each other. Now while it is clear that all forms of absolutist/dictatorial government must have a number of commonalities - if one (or a few) people have control of an entire country then we can assume there will be at least a significant minority actively opposed to this, so large scale imprisonment or worse of political opponents is almost certain, the media is likely to be heavily censored or completely controlled, they are likely to start wars to provide a common enemy to distract the populace with (arguably a feature of all governments throughout history), and either control or regularly purge the military to protect against a military coup, etc. Given that it is always easy to try and make a case like this, but you barely have to scratch the surface of the two systems in practise to know there wasn't exactly a lot in common between them apart from the minimal set of commonalities you would expect to find - especially if you bring Marx into the equation and claim to be discussing what he described - a utopian vision of workers slowly realising they are the key engine of the economy and thus coming to run things in some anarchic community organisation type way, as opposed to the actual existing Communism - basically a fairly generic populist dictatorship with only a couple of distinctive features such as a very heavily state ordered economy, which could probably be argued to be almost exactly the opposite to what Marx seemed to be envisaging.


Why the hell did you go to all this trouble to share and respond to a comment not even on this site?
 
2011-09-07 04:56:15 PM  
Sim City joins the great wall of poutrage.

i55.tinypic.com
 
2011-09-07 05:04:24 PM  

Jackpot777: Sim City joins the great wall of poutrage.

[i55.tinypic.com image 640x512]


Of course, this reminds me:

List of People Conspiring Against the GOP, and therefor, America
(LOPCATGOPATA for short):
Liberals
Democrats
Socialists
Geologists
Biologists
Meteorologists
Atheists
Muslims
Jews
ABC
NBC
CNN
CBS
PBS
All of cable except FNC
The New York Times
The LA Times
The Washington Post
The Associated Press
Reuters
BBC
The Guardian
Black People
Mexicans
Human Rights Activists
SCOTUS
Europe
Movie Industry
Television Industry
Environmentalists
ACLU
The United Nations
Labor Unions
Colleges
Teachers
Professors
ACORN
National Endowment for the Arts
Gays
Judges
NPR
Paleontologists
Astrophysicists
Museums (*except Creationism Museum)
WHO
WTO
Inflated tires
The Honolulu Advertiser
The Star Bulletin
Teletubbies
Sponge Bob and Patrick
Nobel Prize Committee
US Census Bureau
Fiscally Sound Republicans
Bumble Bees
Standards and Poors
SimCity
 
2011-09-07 05:11:11 PM  

AkaranD: I loved societies... but it wasn't Sim City. It was something else.

I'd kill for a 2011 version of Sim City 2000.


There's a SimCity for iPad, and it is very similar to SC2000. It's worth the $5 or whatever (if you already have an iPad that is... Otherwise the game will cost you $505, with a free iPad thrown in)

I liked SimCity 4 w/ Rush Hour add-on, and I downloaded a lot of user-generated art for new buildings. I want THAT for the iPad.
 
2011-09-07 05:13:48 PM  
27.media.tumblr.com
 
2011-09-07 07:10:02 PM  

Treygreen13: Why the hell did you go to all this trouble to share and respond to a comment not even on this site?


Well it's not like the guy is gonna respond back.

Instant. Internet. Victory.
 
2011-09-07 09:41:04 PM  
Thorium salt nuke plants will be the next effective energy solution, barring a tremendous advance in solar power efficiency.

Incredibly low environmental impact and is effectively melt-down proof because of the properties of the salt.

Wind/water are great and should be used, but aren't effective in places like the Rockies. We're going to need more power than that.
 
2011-09-09 10:03:33 PM  
I use to listen to Clayton Morris on his podcast Grizzly Bear Egg Cafe, and i always thought it was weird he hosted a Fox show, but i guess he's a sellout. I don't think he really believes the crap he's spewing on Fox, since he seems to be much more liberal on his podcast.
 
Displayed 44 of 44 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report