Page 2 of 2
Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 5:30 pm
by swatter555
I'm not saying that I want violent video games banned or anything, but to say that its ok to have violent games because other forms of media are violent is a fallacy.
On the other hand, I have only seen a very few games I find truly objectionable, such as Manhunt. I think the science is too conflicting at the moment to make a final judgement one way or the other. Video game developers pre-hot coffee were big time into pushing the envelope. Now they have seen the backlash can actually hurt them, they are attempting to tone it down a bit. An interesting interview, though.
Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm
by JC Viper
I remember my parents getting me Street Fighter II and Mortal Kombat... we went outside to be kids then we hung out in who ever's house and played those games along with Doom. Pretty balanced life, no violence as I recalled.
I bought the first GTA game being under aged but we thought it was cartoonish and just laughed at all the funny words that the characters would blurt out. No anger then.
Came highschool and interaction with real bullies and stupid people caused me and my friends to start getting defensive, hitting our way out if we were surrounded. Teachers would punish us more severely.
Now as adults we only get angry at how stupid some people can be and things they do to affect us, like me and stupid drivers that don't appear to pay attention. I get angry, like I want to kill them. No video game made me this way, society made me this way.
Even though we are angry adults from time to time we're pretty laid back missing the days of just going to school and coming home to play videogames.
It's pretty late, I dunno if this sounds like a jumble mumble.
Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 11:35 pm
by NorthernPete
Ohhh, I generated a topic with a mildly high interest rate......
Playing Sim city made me want to go out and become a municipal planner...
Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 1:24 am
by storysunfolding
NorthernPete wrote:Ohhh, I generated a topic with a mildly high interest rate......
Playing Sim city made me want to go out and become a municipal planner...
Sure, until Godzilla destroyed half of the harbor district and your police force did NOTHING.
Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:24 am
by CNF2002
we get these murder simulators, in which it's acceptable to kill a prostitute for her money and hen molest the corpse
What the heck video game did you play??
Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 5:38 am
by DivideOverflow
Sevulturus wrote:
Blaming videogames for the violence in a society where weapons - most specifically handguns and rifles are easily availble, along with all sorts of illegal mind altering substances. If you have a weapon you're going to use it, whether you play videogames or not.
Que?
I have a whole cache of weapons, and I have only ever used them responsibly and in the right place for such things... I would focus more on those illegal mind altering substances.
I've played video games since I was 4 years old. My parent's didn't let me play violent ones until I was mature enough to understand the difference between real violence and video games. I might concede that I played too many video games in my youth, but that should even strengthen the point.
Even though I was exposed to every violent video game on the market in my teens, I never started any fights, had anger or aggression issues, or felt the urge to kill someone. Why? Because I'm not a violent person... but I find violent video games to be fun.
Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 6:04 am
by Nalian
ofblong wrote:Sevulturus wrote:
Then I pulled my head out of my "O Ring".
1) It's a shitty parent that allows a young kid to play a videogame with a M rating... I used to work at a movie theater and I would see parents taking toddlers into R and pg-13 movies. I saw a baby go into LotR. My friends have worked in EB and it's not unusual for a soccer mom to buy a game like GTA for their young kids
wait a minute here. Allowing a child to play a rated M game and allowing a child who can understand the differences play a rated M game is 2 different things. I let my son play ut2004 and serious sam 2. Now they dont have real people in it and he is under 13 but explaining things about the game and how it isnt real goes a long way to making a child understand and comprehend along with using common sense. If my son started walking around talking about killing people then I would realize "hey he needs a break from gaming to understand that its not real".
Now I am by no means a perfect parent as my son did have nightmares one night. I didnt let him play those games for almost a year because of it. Now he plays them but I only allow it 1x/week for at most an hour. So just because they are under 13 doesnt mean they cant play and understand the difference. My son doesnt run around the house yelling im going to kill you or anything like that. Nor does he get mad if something isnt going his way. Just because he is under 13 doesnt mean I cant let him play it. You just have to watch for signs that your child isnt comprehending the difference between real life and video games. Most parents most likely dont see that difference however.
But see - you're doing something that Jack Thompson doesn't think you should have to do. You're actually looking at the content of something your kid wants to consume and making a decision for him. Jack Thompson wants all of these games to no longer exist, period, so that parents don't need to pay attention.
It's just more of the same BS - trying to legislate accountability and morality.
Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:50 am
by ofblong
Nalian wrote:ofblong wrote:Sevulturus wrote:
Then I pulled my head out of my "O Ring".
1) It's a shitty parent that allows a young kid to play a videogame with a M rating... I used to work at a movie theater and I would see parents taking toddlers into R and pg-13 movies. I saw a baby go into LotR. My friends have worked in EB and it's not unusual for a soccer mom to buy a game like GTA for their young kids
wait a minute here. Allowing a child to play a rated M game and allowing a child who can understand the differences play a rated M game is 2 different things. I let my son play ut2004 and serious sam 2. Now they dont have real people in it and he is under 13 but explaining things about the game and how it isnt real goes a long way to making a child understand and comprehend along with using common sense. If my son started walking around talking about killing people then I would realize "hey he needs a break from gaming to understand that its not real".
Now I am by no means a perfect parent as my son did have nightmares one night. I didnt let him play those games for almost a year because of it. Now he plays them but I only allow it 1x/week for at most an hour. So just because they are under 13 doesnt mean they cant play and understand the difference. My son doesnt run around the house yelling im going to kill you or anything like that. Nor does he get mad if something isnt going his way. Just because he is under 13 doesnt mean I cant let him play it. You just have to watch for signs that your child isnt comprehending the difference between real life and video games. Most parents most likely dont see that difference however.
But see - you're doing something that Jack Thompson doesn't think you should have to do. You're actually looking at the content of something your kid wants to consume and making a decision for him. Jack Thompson wants all of these games to no longer exist, period, so that parents don't need to pay attention.
It's just more of the same BS - trying to legislate accountability and morality.
true cant argue with you
. I know that my son wanted to play GTA vice city so I played it. No way in hell would I allow my son to play that game until he is older like 16 lol. When you have a car to which you can rape prostitutes run over normal people etc etc thats not a game for a young child to play.
Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 6:34 pm
by jmillheiser
As someone who was the victim of bullies myself in school I can tell you the real cause of those school shootings.
Its the standard policy of school districts to punish the victims of bullies instead of the bullies. If you report a bully to a teacher nothing is done about the bully. If you fight back against the bully nothing is done about the bully, BUT you get in trouble for fighting back against them.
what im getting at here is SOCIETY ENCOURAGES BULLIES. Most bullies are encouraged by their parents as well who will usually threaten to sue the school if the school tries to punish the bully.
Its the whole "My little angel could never be a bully, and my Lawyer agrees with me"