Black Raven Dragoons

[MaxRile]

this like is to G4TV Atk of the Show.
http://g4tv.com/attackoftheshow/theloop/72634/Supreme-Court-vs-The-Video-Game-Industry.html

[Zancarius]

Ever since Columbine there have been forces in this country (I'm looking at you, Jack Thompson--thank goodness you got disbarred) that have desperately been trying to bring irreparable harm to the video game industry. Some are motived by taxes--which worked out real well for tobacco--and others are motivated by some mystical doppleganger under their kid's bed. It's disconcerting.

Edit: As an aside, I have yet to see a fully independent study that wasn't funded by some "SAVE THE CHILDREN!" lobby that can conclusively prove that video games promote violence. If nothing else, they provide young people with an outlet for violence that is much safer for society. Ultimately, though, it is up to the parents to parent their children.

[Killemal]

How about the broad that shook her baby to death after playing Farmville? OBVIOUSLY there is a correlation between video games and violent acts.

[Zancarius]

Clearly she was trying to shake the wheat from the chaff.

Ooooooooooooh knee-slap.

[MaxRile]

Its my beleave that a lack of parenting is involved in this in almost ever case, I can picture it in my head how one person would walkin on someone playing a game like Borderlands or Left 4 Dead and think the worst just by hearing the gun shots, explosions and carnage. For this reason is why ppl FUCKING INVENTED HEAD PHONES!

that and explaining it to the simple minded that its an outlet is to complex at the time b/c all you wanna do is kill shit/do shit (some games dont involve killing)

[Zancarius]

Its my beleave that a lack of parenting is involved in this in almost ever case, I can picture it in my head how one person would walkin on someone playing a game like Borderlands or Left 4 Dead and think the worst just by hearing the gun shots, explosions and carnage. For this reason is why ppl FUCKING INVENTED HEAD PHONES!

that and explaining it to the simple minded that its an outlet is to complex at the time b/c all you wanna do is kill shit/do shit (some games dont involve killing)

I agree.

Puzzle games are fun (periodically), but there's one thing that blame-video-games-first crowd doesn't understand: Human nature. One example that comes to mind is the abolishment of allowing young children to "play war" in its various incantations over the years. Think in terms of the politically incorrect "cowboys and indians," versus all the various things some of our male members might recall having done as children--Matchbox and other assorted companies have made a killing off of toy tanks and implements of war for a reason. Hint: It's nothing to do with puzzle games. Humans, male humans in particular, are aggressive and require an outlet for our primal tendencies be it work, games, or sports.

As Sunder pointed out, violent video games are an outlet for aggression. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, and I would much rather someone take their aggression out on killing fictional characters than on someone in real life. This reason alone should be enough to encourage the adoption of video games. Though, some proponents of banning violence in games (Jack Thompson comes to mind again) claim that the increasing realism of violent video games blurs the line between fiction and reality, and particularly troubled individuals have a hard time distinguishing between the two.

Now, maybe it's just me, but I would think that if someone can't tell the difference between fiction and reality, they really need their head examined. However, I can't imagine this being commonplace, otherwise games like Tetris would have caused no end of grief for younger siblings.

Or like the case of the old geezer who plowed through a shopping mall killing 9 people. I don't recall authorities blaming Carmageddon on his rampage, and I'm pretty sure he didn't play video games, either. What this particular case does prove isn't that video games kill people, it's that growing older kills people. Especially those who happen to be taking an afternoon stroll in the path of a raging Buick.

I think the entire principle is just patently absurd. It doesn't help that the proponents against violent videos games always manage to drag out some mentally disturbed teenager who killed someone purportedly because of a game. (Actually, I find this assignment of blame a perfect example of bad parenting: The parents, rather than analyzing the environment they created for their children, seek to find something artificial to pass blame to, and what better place than to find some wealthy game publisher to sue!)

It's like Sunder said, though. It's just bad parenting. If you have kids that express violent tendencies, buy them counselling instead of video games. If you have children who tend to express an interest in physical things, enroll them into sports so they can take out their aggression on the field rather than brooding at home. Video games aren't a babysitter.*

Anyway, rant off. Apologies for the slightly disconnected thoughts. I didn't feel like structuring this appropriately.

* Yes, this argument avoids entirely the issue of children growing up in poor neighborhoods exposed to drugs and crime. While appropriate, I think that topic is inapplicable to the issue of games, which are typically most accessible to--and generally blamed for violent acts by--more affluent families. Case in point? Columbine. Those kids committed horrible acts of murder and came from fairly well-to-do families.