I never thought and still do not think that games make the peope who play it aggressive or affect them in any way except addicting them, but now with the better graphics and more realism I might have to change my opinion ...
The future will allow us to make even more detailed games and I think that when people will see almost photorealistic exploding heads and guts (Oh ... look that nice liver over there) they might not become serial killers, but will become insensible to real life ...
And that worries me a bit.
Anyways, as long as your head isn't empty this should not happen.
Hence, games will get more and more violent, movies more graphic, because if it stays around the level it is, then people will get bored and stop playing. I'm sad to admit I'm like this. After all, look at FPS's. It went from Wolfenstein 3D, where a dead guy bleeds and falls down, to Doom, where the corpses are bloodier, to quake, where people can literally explode, to a game like Aliens Vs Predator 2, where not only can people explode, but you can dismember the corpses (rip an arm off as an alien, collect severed heads as a predator, etc). Then there's Soldier of Fortune... shoot a guy in the stomach with a shotgun over and over and watch his guts start to fall out.
And I think it's just going to get worse. Games where it's more realistic, where you can kill in so many more inventive ways, where you're killing more people, bloodier deaths, et cetera. Someday GTA3 will be somewhat tame compared to other types of things we can do.
Are people evil? For the most part, no. Do they have the capacity for evil? Absolutely.
Maybe, just maybe, you need to "hit a pillow" once in a while, so you don't sock someone that gets the last cheeseburger at lunch.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
Gikkwiny thought this was the Ricky Martin Fan Club Forum and wrote:
Him being from Texas has NOTHING to do with it. Him having issues (and damn good onesm, too)) with a game promoting cop killing and/or felonies has to do with it. Don't just be like "He's from Tezas, so he's mad."
Sarcasm. Since when has Kameks ever posted serious stuff?
quote:
We were all impressed when Dr. Vorbis wrote:
Sarcasm. Since when has Kameks ever posted serious stuff?
I want my old Paul554 name back so people will stop looking for a humor disclamer on my posts.
Sig pic done with Microsoft paint, Work that doobie Pikachu.
Maybe they need to start requiring psych evaluations before allowing people to purchase violent games, but I can't support any effort to limit the content of said games.
Sar...
quote:
Tyewa Dawnsister had this to say about Reading Rainbow:
Around 2pm this afternoon a kid comes in, didn't look any older than 13 maybe 14 and asks to buy a copy of Grand Thieft Auto III. Since the game is rated Mature, and as per state laws, I ask him for a photo ID and inform him that he would need be either 17 yeas of age or have a parent with him.
Hm, don't know what state you live in, that may very well be the law there. But I know that in Colorado at least the game ratings are considered purely advisory and have no legally mandated enforecement.
I've always wondered at the logic of some minimum age requirements on several things. Seems like they claim there's some magic age where a person becomes more mature and able to handle the product. I remember a campaign trying to crack down on underage smoking. I think they missed the point; the real problem wasn't the children under 18 were smoking but that ANYONE was smoking. Ciggarettes aren't any better for the health of adults as they are for children. Ironically, the mimimum age for cigarettes probably cause more ham than good; most children under 18 probably wouldn't try to smoke them if they weren't illegal. Reminds me of a funny story I've hear before, of a man who owned a restaurant overlooking the lake. The second floor had a balcony that leaned over the lake, the first floor a big window that looked on to the lake. Despite a sign that clearly stated "No Fishing Over the Balcony," people would constantly fish there. The lead weights they used would hit the window on the way down and crack it. Tired of having to keep repairing and replacing the window, the manager did something to prevent people from fishing over the balcony. Worked almost immediately, people completely stopped fishing, and he never had the problem again. What did he do? He took the sign down. Moral of the story: some people wouldn't even think of doing certain things if they weren't told they couldn't.
Not saying that there shouldn't be some age limits. But maturity doesn't necessarily come with age. I've know some 25 year olds that can't be trusted to drink responsibly any more than some 16 year olds. They didn't magicall become mature and responsible when they turned 21.
[ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: DarkDragoon ]
quote:
Leopold, the Voice of Reason wrote, obviously thinking too hard:
I own GTA3. I get a kick out of the antics; I get excitement out of running digital people down and chasing (or demolishing) the police and their vehicles. With that said, I'd rather run down a million GTA3 people than punch a real person.A friend of mine was having some real problems with rage he was bottling up, with no real outlet for it. A friend lent him GTA3; he was able to get his agressions out through it, to the benefit of his mental state.
I would be a fool, however, if I used that to say "GTA3 helps people with pent-up rage". Just the same, I would be a fool if I said "ESRB is a joke and should be abolished". The fact is, people are too different for there to be one effective means of controlling who's allowed access to what medium of entertainment, or what facet of it. I do not agree with ESRB, and I was slightly bothered when I was carded for Max Payne (thankfully, mom was there)--but by the same token, I understand that people aren't willing to put forth the effort necessary to utilize a better system.
However, I think it's worth mentioning that in a thread involving violent idiots, a game about murdering and destroying, and the human race's attitude towards the maturity of minors, the thing that's bothered me most has been Pesco's statement to Del.
-Carl.
Good point, I agree with you. I also agree with Cadga. These people you run over and kill aren't REAL. What is the harm in killing a FAKE thing? I fail to comprehend what is wrong with violence in games if everything is FAKE.
The daily news is now and will forever be the most violent show on Television, and yes I'm including premium cable.
Comparing a depiction of violence to actual violence is pure ignorance.
quote:
Maradön? had this to say about (_|_):
Comparing a depiction of violence to actual violence is pure ignorance.
To someone not young enough to comprehend the difference, they're exactly the same thing.
Not the fault of the game, but rather of the parents. If a child can't tell the difference, it's the parents' fault!
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage had this to say about Cuba:
Not the fault of the game, but rather of the parents. If a child can't tell the difference, it's the parents' fault!
Exactly... so let's empower parents with the ability to more easily control and judge what sort of media their children have access to...
...like game ratings, for instance?
I wanted to slap her.
Perhaps I missed what you were getting at. Sounded in favor of removal rather than labeling.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
Sadly Drysart game ratings just aren't enough sometimes. Today I personally witnessed several parents buy games such as GTA3 for their young kids, some under the age of 10, even after they were informed of the game's rating and content.
Some parent's just do not believe that video games can influence their childern. In these cases it is indeed the parent's fault, but I cannot help but feel guilty in selling games such as these to parents who obiviously do not understand or care what their child is exposed to. No child no matter how mature should be exposed to the content in a game such as GTA3 at such an age (<10).
What I want more than anything is the ability to refuse sale of games such as GTA3 to kids under 13, even if they have a parent present. In these cases it would become harder and force me to make judgement calls, but I would sleep better at night. [ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: Tyewa Dawnsister ]
quote:
Bloodsage had this to say about John Romero:
Perhaps I missed what you were getting at.Sounded in favor of removal rather than labeling.
I was poo-pooing Maradon's presumption that because it's only simulated violence, it's ok.
quote:
Tyewa Dawnsister had this to say about Jimmy Carter:
What I want more than anything is the ability to refuse sale of games such as GTA3 to kids under 13, even if they have a parent present. In these cases it would become harder and force me to make judgement calls, but I would sleep better at night.
If I'm not mistaken, that's what the AO (Adults Only) rating is for, unfortunately you won't see that applied to any big commercial titles for the same reason you don't see any big commercial movies rated NC-17.
That's not really true, though.
I got my very own shotgun for my 10th birthday. I kept it, and the ammunition, in my room, and could go hunting any time I chose.
Kids can handle a surprising amount of responsibility at an amazingly young age, if their parents aren't morons.
And hunting, for example, is a great way to show kids death and violence up close, teach them the difference between that and games, and show them responsible behavior around firearms all at the same time.
It's not the games; it's the parents. [ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: Bloodsage ]
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
Bloodsage I work in a game shop, I hear kids this young talking about graphic violence with such a degree of glee and all I can do is boggle at what parent would allow their child to be exposed to such things. I understand that childern should be taught respect for violence and understand that death is a very permenant thing. I also owned my first gun at a very young age, learned to hunt, and learned respect for firearms. My father was a gunsmith and a disabled Marine, and growing up in the Texas back country I learned it all. What these kids want is graphic violence, they want to see that graphic violence against humans, and they enjoy it. This is an obivious failure on the parent's part to teach those basic lessons of life, death, and respect for both.
Video games are a cop out for parents who are failing in that role, and there really is no excuse for them. The question is at what point do I, or anyone else for that matter, need to step in to do something about it.?
Yes it's the ugly head of sensorship and government regulation, something that we as a country have been struggling with for over two hundred years. Ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away. To make matters worse pushing the problem back on parents won't work as there is nothing a parent hates more than to be told they don't know how to raise their child. Sigh, well I'm too tired tonight to think about it, but as a parent, it scares me, it really does.
If the parents are failing their duty, it's not your place to jump in and tell them they can't buy that videogame for their spoiled-brat offspring. It wouldn't help, and it only denies legitimate entertainment for those who can handle it.
Life isn't fair.
The kids whose parents screw them will simply have to be screwed. They'll end up doing poorly in school. They'll end up in jail. They'll end up second- or third-class citizens.
Sucks to be them.
Unfortunately, though, the more everyone else steps in to "help" the bad parents, the more those parents expect, and the lazier they become. Worse, those marginal parents who aren't doing too bad a job may simply decide it's easier for others to do the work, and opt out of their responsibilities.
Personally, I'm sick and damned tired of all the aiming at the lowest common denominator. I saw it in school, where all the money and effort went to the "challenged" kids, and I was left bored. I see it everywhere, where my legitimate adult entertainments are curtailed simply because some lazy buffoon of a parent doesn't want to have to check what his or her kid is watching on TV or the internet, or might see in a movie or at a restaurant.
If we put half the effort into creating opportunities for the truly gifted that we do manufacturing illusory self-esteem for the stupid, we'd get far better returns.
In short, enforcement of laws is the answer, not government babysitting.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage wrote this then went back to looking for porn:
Unfortunately, governments can't be in the business of rearing children.If the parents are failing their duty, it's not your place to jump in and tell them they can't buy that videogame for their spoiled-brat offspring. It wouldn't help, and it only denies legitimate entertainment for those who can handle it.
Life isn't fair.
The kids whose parents screw them will simply have to be screwed. They'll end up doing poorly in school. They'll end up in jail. They'll end up second- or third-class citizens.
Sucks to be them.
Unfortunately, though, the more everyone else steps in to "help" the bad parents, the more those parents expect, and the lazier they become. Worse, those marginal parents who aren't doing too bad a job may simply decide it's easier for others to do the work, and opt out of their responsibilities.
Personally, I'm sick and damned tired of all the aiming at the lowest common denominator. I saw it in school, where all the money and effort went to the "challenged" kids, and I was left bored. I see it everywhere, where my legitimate adult entertainments are curtailed simply because some lazy buffoon of a parent doesn't want to have to check what his or her kid is watching on TV or the internet, or might see in a movie or at a restaurant.
If we put half the effort into creating opportunities for the truly gifted that we do manufacturing illusory self-esteem for the stupid, we'd get far better returns.
In short, enforcement of laws is the answer, not government babysitting.
Amen brutha
Like I said ignoring the problem won't make it go away, and the law at least as to how it applies to me is being followed. The ironic thing is most states do not have laws that forbid the sale of Mature rated games to minors. The ironic thing is that when a child is sold this game it comes back to me and not the parent. If I sold GTA3 to a 10 year old and that kid's parent complained to local law enforcement then I would be the one fined, not the store I work in which pushed me to sell the game and ignore the law, not the parent who for some reason left the child alone in a mall long enough to wait in line and purchase the game, not the advertisers who push M rated games on nationaly televised programs with large underage audiances. Pfft enforcement of the law, whatever. The law has to target the right problem and then be enforced. You can enforce worthless laws all you want, but it doesn't get rid of the problem at hand.
Also ignoring social issues, like poor parenting, only leads to an inevitiable decline of a society. I believe it was Asmoiv who said, 'History is nothing more than a race between Education and Diaster. With ignorance and fear being the fuel for both.' It's a hard lesson, but allowing parents to take a lackluster approach to child raising, then focusing attention on the social issues that arise after the fact is self defeating. The problem continues, it becomes harder and more expensive to deal with, and the source of the problem doesn't go away. Heh, it's a perfect analogy to our countries prison system too!
Either way, I don't want the government to poke it's nose into my business more than it has to, but social issues, such as childern exposed to graphic violence, that parents can not or will not take accountability for is just unacceptable. I don't have a good solution, I don't think anyone has a "good solution" for it, but it cannot be ignored.
There is no link between cartoon depiction of "graphic violence," however you want to define that, and actual violent behavior.
And the laws to which I am referring are not those addressing who is allowed to purchase or own which consumer goods. I am speaking of the laws against violence, against theft, et cetera.
Those are the ones we must enforce.
Who cares what the alleged "cause" of the violent behavior was? All focusing on video games does is build yet one more excuse for anti-social behavior into the system. Excuses need to stop, and being held responsible for one's actions needs to begin.
Granted, there are things minors should not have access to on their own. They should not be prohibited universally, however, simply because a certain segment of society refuses to rear their children properly.
That segment of society always has, and always will exist. We need to face that fact. We need to write off the worthless, rather than either wasting time and effort babysitting them, or, worse, dumbing down the rest of society to make them feel better.
It offends me no end that Barnes & Noble won't sell me a latte without a lid on it. I hate the way it mooshes the foam. But, just because some stupid McDonald's customer--through her own negligence--spilled hot coffee on lap, I have to be protected from myself.
That attitude is far worse for society, in the long run.
We need to raise standards of behavior, not reduce potential opportunities for misbehavior.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
Sig pic done with Microsoft paint, Work that doobie Pikachu.
quote:
Bloodsage wrote this then went back to looking for porn:
There is no link between cartoon depiction of "graphic violence," however you want to define that, and actual violent behavior.
Only a fool wouldn't be able to see an obivous link to graphic violence, such as that found in games like GTA3, to criminal and anti social behavior in childern who are exposed to that content before they are mature enough to handle it. True, violence of that type is avaliable in many other forms, movies, cable television, on the street corner in the inner city, etc. What these avenues don't offer is a chance for a child to act out, without reprocusions, these violent and criminal acts on good facsimilies of humans. Also, just because it is avaliable elsewhere doesn't excuse parents of their responsability to their kids, or society's responsability to protect it's more valuable resource, it's childern.
I'm a true liberal, I believe everyone deserves a fair chance to live their life to the fullest. It sickens me when parents rob their childern from that fair chance by failing to teach and raise their childern. The root of so many of the social issues we have in the world today can be directly associated to what a person was exposed to in childhood. It cannot just be written off, as the problem will just continue to grow.
I'll check the thread again tomorrow morning, I'm way too tired right now, and I have work tomorrow.
quote:
And I was all like 'Oh yeah?' and Kameks was all like:
I say every year all gamers should have to take an anger diagnosise test (or what ever their called) to see if their mentally stable then the rating system would determine what games you cna buy legally depending on your results.
... good lord, that's the first good idea I've heard Kameks say. And I agree with it. Completely. It should be based on the intelligence, maturity, and mental developpment of a person, rather than just saying "They're 15? They're BANNED".
I'm frightened.
Sig pic done with Microsoft paint, Work that doobie Pikachu.
quote:
Kameks stumbled drunkenly to the keyboard and typed:
I say every year all gamers should have to take an anger diagnosise test (or what ever their called) to see if their mentally stable then the rating system would determine what games you cna buy legally depending on your results.
Sounds great, but how would you rate that?
quote:
Tyewa Dawnsister had this to say about dark elf butts:
Greetings,Only a fool wouldn't be able to see an obivous link to graphic violence, such as that found in games like GTA3, to criminal and anti social behavior in childern who are exposed to that content before they are mature enough to handle it. True, violence of that type is avaliable in many other forms, movies, cable television, on the street corner in the inner city, etc. What these avenues don't offer is a chance for a child to act out, without reprocusions, these violent and criminal acts on good facsimilies of humans. Also, just because it is avaliable elsewhere doesn't excuse parents of their responsability to their kids, or society's responsability to protect it's more valuable resource, it's childern.
I'm a true liberal, I believe everyone deserves a fair chance to live their life to the fullest. It sickens me when parents rob their childern from that fair chance by failing to teach and raise their childern. The root of so many of the social issues we have in the world today can be directly associated to what a person was exposed to in childhood. It cannot just be written off, as the problem will just continue to grow.
I'll check the thread again tomorrow morning, I'm way too tired right now, and I have work tomorrow.
I'm used to being called names by those who disagree, but I'm rarely called a fool. It's fairly tough to make stick.
You'll simply have to excuse my arrogance if I don't mistake your gut feelings for scientific proof of a link between cartoon violence and actual violence. You know, since the real studies haven't found a link, and all. 
Simply waiving your ideological wand and stating your position as "a true liberal," as if that had any actual meaning, is worse than silly: it's irresponsible. Perhaps, if you took the time to think through your positions, and have actual logic to support them, you'd fare better in a discussion of this nature?
So, while you've managed to wave your beliefs around, you've not answered any of the actual arguments. So I'll give you another chance.
Perhaps you were just tired.
But you should really re-think your assumption that misfortune in childhood has much, if anything to do with behavior as an adult. Those who grew up in the licentious '20s pulled it together and won WWII through sheer determination, hard work, and self-sacrifice. Those whose childhood was characterized by the deprivations of the Depression and the War, grew up to be the steady generation of the '50s.
Even a cursory look at history completely blows your theory away . . . .
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Unfortunately, governments can't be in the business of rearing children.
I really hope it was sarcasm, I can't tell when it comes from Sagemeister.
quote:
Drysart stumbled drunkenly to the keyboard and typed:
To someone not young enough to comprehend the difference, they're exactly the same thing.
Yes, that's what I just said. Only people with a complete ignorance of real violence would associate it with depictions.
That's where parents come in to teach children the difference.
I was reading Predator comic books when I was nine. I turned out OK now didn't I? (well at least I turned out fairly non-violent).
Why is that? Because my PARENTS (dad specifically) taught me the difference between depictions of violence and real life violence.
The link that binds violent media to violent behavior is simple enough: Bad parents. [ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: Maradön? ]
quote:
Check out the big brain on Demitri!
This line makes me laugh and giggle to no end.I really hope it was sarcasm, I can't tell when it comes from Sagemeister.
I doubt he is. I don't want the govt around when it comes to the raising of my children. Telling me how to raise my child is NOT thier job. If I choose to disipline my child I will do it my way not the way the govt tells me I should.
On the issue of game ratings I take it to heart for sure. My 3 year old wanders into the room while I'm playing Diablo II and I pause or Alt Tab out. I don't want her exposed to it. My buddy's kid loves sci-fi and fantasy. He's 6 and knows Episode 1 by heart. His father has told him he won't be seeing LoTR until he's 12 at least. I tape shows that are a bit too intense and watch them later. (Alias for one because the poor girl is constantly in trouble) Maybe I'm shielding my kids too much for some. But when she's old enough to handle it she will be exposed to it and will have Daddy or Mommy to talk about it to her.
Hands on parenting, it works.
quote:
Kaglaaz How'ler had this to say about John Romero:
On the issue of game ratings I take it to heart for sure. My 3 year old wanders into the room while I'm playing Diablo II and I pause or Alt Tab out. I don't want her exposed to it. My buddy's kid loves sci-fi and fantasy. He's 6 and knows Episode 1 by heart. His father has told him he won't be seeing LoTR until he's 12 at least. I tape shows that are a bit too intense and watch them later. (Alias for one because the poor girl is constantly in trouble) Maybe I'm shielding my kids too much for some. But when she's old enough to handle it she will be exposed to it and will have Daddy or Mommy to talk about it to her.
I'm not criticizing you, but I just don't see any reason for doing all that as long as you explain to your kid what's happening and that it's not real and shouldn't be.
quote:
Demitri thought this was the Ricky Martin Fan Club Forum and wrote:
This line makes me laugh and giggle to no end.I really hope it was sarcasm, I can't tell when it comes from Sagemeister.
I didn't mean it sarcastically, though. Was it my choice of verb?
Technically, one raises livestock and rears children, but the distinction is out of fashion these days. I use it simply to avoid tempting weenies into attempting to grammar-Nazi me.
Most who try regret it, but it tends to derail the conversation.
Now I'm all paranoid, wondering what was so funny. 
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
And I was all like 'Oh yeah?' and Bloodsage was all like:
I didn't mean it sarcastically, though. Was it my choice of verb?
Technically, one raises livestock and rears children, but the distinction is out of fashion these days. I use it simply to avoid tempting weenies into attempting to grammar-Nazi me.
Most who try regret it, but it tends to derail the conversation.
Now I'm all paranoid, wondering what was so funny.
From the way it's worded, it sounds like you want the government actively involved in the raising(rearing, what the fuck ever) of someone's children.
I find that to be both scary and funny.
No the "unfortunately" refers to the argument I'm debunking. It's unfortunate for that particular world-view that governments can't do what they want.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage had this to say about pies:
I see, now.
No the "unfortunately" refers to the argument I'm debunking. It's unfortunate for that particular world-view that governments can't do what they want.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Thank god.
