You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
June 22, 2018, 02:26:02 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Violent Games and Minors  (Read 3767 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ojokernegro

Re: Violent Games and Minors
« Reply #50 on: November 22, 2010, 12:27:33 PM »
The interfaces of video games and the act of firing a weapon are completely different things. I served in the US army for many years and have operated a variety of weapon types including but not limited to Pistol, assault rifle, light machinegun, sniper rifle, shotgun, heavy machinegun, and sub-machinegun. As a training tool for operating such weapons video games are very bad. Even with vibration on the feel of recoil isnt the same, making people over or under adjust aim. Aiming is highly irregular as well, if video games were used as a teaching tool it would only teach to aim with ones eyes, not with the whole body and all of the senses. At best they can help people train their reaction times but as far as teaching people how to fire, no. Its about the worst training tool I can think of

I whole-heartedly support this post above.
Also, games need to sell to 13 old kids because they are obviously the better consumers (it is a business after all). Thirteen year olds would misplace/ruin their games only to buy a new one whether adults are too responsible to do so (actually misplace/ruin a game). In other words, kids care less about spending on games than adults do, they simply do not have the same sense of "cost of opportunity" (most 18 year olds would think twice about getting a game, because they also want to buy a lot of other stuff). There's really not much science to it.   

Offline mystictiger

Re: Violent Games and Minors
« Reply #51 on: November 22, 2010, 05:37:07 PM »
The 'advantage' of old-fashioned warfare is that it was done in the mud on a human scale. You're confronted directly with the result of your action in the form of the bloody corpse lying a few meters away from you.

How is piloting a drone any different from playing a computer game? You wake up in your nice, air-conditioned bedroom, shower, put on your suit / uniform, drive to the office, log on, and then you fire a missile into a house a few countries away.

The question of the military is an interesting one for another reason - on the one hand, we say that 'violence is wrong' and on the other we are undertaking active shooty-shooty combat in various parts of the world. People who kill people in one context are praised as heroes, while on the other we see violence as something bad that we should shield our children from.

I am not saying that war is wrong - there are times that an injustice is so great that kicking arse and killing people is the only way to end / correct that wrong. Rather, I think lying to children about the nature of life, shielding them and trying to wrap them in cotton wool is bad.

Warning - this post is written after drinking rather too much whisky.

Offline SabbyTopic starter

Re: Violent Games and Minors
« Reply #52 on: November 28, 2010, 02:32:08 AM »
Warning - this post is written after drinking rather too much whisky.

Look out! A drunk gamer endorsing guns! Hide the children!

Offline Bayushi

Re: Violent Games and Minors
« Reply #53 on: November 30, 2010, 07:09:03 PM »
When I worked in a bookstore, I once spent half an hour convincing the wife of a county prosecutor that letting her 15-year-old son play D&D with his friends wasn't going to turn him from a straight-A student into a raving delinquent.  I'm not entirely sure she believed me when I said I'd played for years, but she did buy the books, at least.


My parents thought similar, regarding my desire to play D&D. Ironically, it was introduced to me by some of my father's shipmates, who would visit the house on occasion.

Later on in life, as an adult, they bought some L5R rpg books for me for Christmas. Not sure if they thought it was less satanic, or that it more appropriately represented my family's ancestry or something. Hell if I know.

I am absolutely against any new laws regarding video games.

We do not need any more such laws, as Congress (nor the States) have the legal basis in which to regulate any such medium. The First Amendment is the FIRST amendment for a reason. It is the most important.

Some people whine about making slippery slope arguments, but this is very much a slippery slope issue. I do not trust Congress (regardless of Party) to make informed decisions, as opposed the usual uninformed and knee-jerk decisions they have been known for over the last three to five decades.

If a parent cannot (or does not) make appropriate decisions regarding their children, then the PARENT(s) need(s) to be held responsible for the behavior of their children. Maybe, just maybe, schools with corporal punishment should incorporate a bit more paddling: As in, paddling the parent(s) when they arrive to pick up their child(ren) after an incident.

If we continue to just punish the child, the parent(s) will NEVER learn, and continue their own destructive behavior.