Title: We're Still Here, Naysayers!
Posted: October 24, 2006 (08:28 AM)
Hilary and Jack. Need I go any further?
Even with all the hooplah over the homosexual angst in Bully and the "Caution: Hot Coffee" warning labels in GTA, we're still here. The American people is still sane. The world is still turning and we are still here to see it turn.
To take a page out of "Bowling of Columbine", would I be justified in saying that this is just another plug to infect us with fear? I try to watch the news, but everyday, someone is groping small children, being gang-raped, or murdering people because they love the name of the Wii (allegedly). To be frank, I'm more afraid of Mr.-and-Mrs.-Video-Games-Are-The-Base-Of-Sin-And-Depravity than I am of people slaughtering someone I know because of Doom or because they still can't beat the first level of Dante's Awakening.
Thompson's scurrilous remarks remind me of a child that won't stop whining until he gets what he wants. Maybe it's attention-seeking. Maybe it's because obsession is his tragic flaw. But that would make him a hero, something more than what he really is: a senile lawyer that just can't get a cookie. You know that gargantuan baby in Spirited Away? I fail to see a difference.
The point is that despite all the diatribes and overweening "acts of justice", the game industry isn't going to go away. We will probably take something away from the criticisms and passively mature, as humans do. We don't need anyone to say that video games are primarily violent out of pandering to the masses, but we're not stupid. As much as people say that the American public is dumbing down, we still have the ability to tell the difference between entertainment and real-life consequences. Sure, there will always be some that break through the cracks, but no system - no government - is perfect, either.
So don't turn to video games as a scapegoat for society's problems or for petty votes, politicians. Unless, of course, that is what you do.
Posted: October 24, 2006 (12:34 PM)
I kinda stopped caring about these kinds of legal battles because they always seem to be to get violent games away from minors rather than outright banning them. I'm 20, so none of this stuff affects me.
Posted: October 24, 2006 (10:11 PM)
Jack Thompson, that's the lawyer I was talking about in the other topic. I think his whole agenda is an excuse to put his face in the media. You can't take someone seriously who is against violence in games and wants to make a game that has you killing everyone at E3. He's obviously going overboard and contradicting himself like crazy.
Posted: November 01, 2006 (07:46 AM)
What politician doesn't contradict himself/herself? It's almost as if it's some hidden law of being a politician. It's crazy.
draqq_zyxx, thank you. Thank you for finally putting those retards down. I've been trying to say the same thing: games are ENTERTAINMENT, not guidebooks for damning yourself! And those that mistake the two are either innocent and inexperienced or downright MORONIC.
I've been playing Drakengard for years, a horrible, bloody game where the main theme is "You always lose, no matter what" but do I go out with a 15th century broadsword and start killing people? No! Do I kill little babies for fear they may grow into giant, man-eating babies? No! And why not, if games are supposedly brain-washing me or pre-determining my way of life? Because games are just that. Games.
Why can't the populace see that? It's vexing. >_O