Are violent video games damaging to society?

[flameboy]

On BBC 1 now, dunno what program it is now.

All arisen from the infamous airport scene in COD MW2. Actually not all one sided as you would expect. There are a few religious people kicking off but also a priest who plays World of Warcraft.

[martinist]

oooo i saw that, nobody mentioned or seemed to know about that dialogue box that pops up at the start of the game telling you there are disturbing scenes you might want to skip past. Nothing about the skip mission part in the pause menu either.

[Daft]

In short, no.

[RoadKill]

I really fucking doubt it

[Iun]

The real question is what damage is society doing to videogames.?

That and how do I turn off the stupid italics?

[Dazz]

In a short answer, no I don't think so. As I always said, if it's about children playing violent games then it's the parents' fault for not watching what they're playing.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Humans are damaging to society.

[Grazza]

In all honesty, I think anything that makes you callous is bad for the soul.

[ReZourceman]

I'll smash your fucking face in if you mud talk my precious video games again.

[Mike1988uk]

No i really don't think so.

It all depends on the type of person you are and if you can handle certain things at certain ages. Thats where parents come into it who should know what their kids can handle.

[SPAMBOT4000]

No.

That's as simple as it needs to be.

If the subject were movies or books or music the question wouldn't even be being raised.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

No.

That's as simple as it needs to be.

If the subject were movies or books or music the question wouldn't even be being raised.
Ah, well, the fact is that the question has indeed been raised in regards to film and music. I don't know about books.

[Dan Dare]

Yeah but we're over that. Nowadays, you can pretty much make anything. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0870984/)

If parents and game stores weren't so pigshit thick as to buy children games like MW2, there wouldn't be a problem. I think games would generally be better too.

[Jimbob]

Nope, because a sane person would realise that a game is a game and shouldn't be taken seriously or re-done in the real world.

If parents and game stores weren't so pigshit thick as to buy children games like MW2, there wouldn't be a problem. I think games would generally be better too.

I couldn't agree more with this. Parents should not be so stupid as to purchase games like GTA, Gears and MW2 for people under the age of the desired game has on the box. Age certificates are there for a reason. People working in an environment that sells games should be more in control with selling games to minors.

[Cube]

I feel sorry for the kids of today. When most of us were kids we could all play violent games and nobody cared.

Did it make us violent? Hell no.

[King_V]

Ok, probably not. But don't you guys ever get this second thought that video games could be the cause of cognitive dissonance/deprivation? All those years of gaming we have spent... Imaging using that time doing something constructive.

But I do notice a few things... After San Andreas, with the inclusion of bmx shooting, I saw kids trying to emulate that, with one of their boys hanging off the back trignuts.

Blame stupid kids and their stupid parents for their low iQ and abuse of our entertainment.

[Goafer]

Blame stupid kids and their stupid parents for their low iQ and abuse of our entertainment.

Can anyone else see the non gamers point of view on this? Try and look at it from an outsiders point of view. A new game has come out where one section involves you actually taking part in murdering hundreds of innocent people. Not just watching, actually doing the killing. And this is considered entertaining by the people that play it. Surely you could see why this is pretty disgusting to non gamers?

I partially agree that it could be damaging, but I do think they are overreacting a lot. There are worse things to worry about when it comes to a childs upbringing (bad parenting for one).

One problem I see with COD is that a parent might look at the box, see the 18 rating and think "oh it's probably gory. Just playing soldiers" and still buy it for them, thinking that gore isn't a problem when it's actually the more subtle adult content that warrants the rating (Moral dilemmas that kids are too young to understand. Adult situations I suppose you'd call it).



Not entirely sure I've explained my views well, but hopefully you get the gist.

[Raining_again]

Can anyone else see the non gamers point of view on this? Try and look at it from an outsiders point of view. A new game has come out where one section involves you actually taking part in murdering hundreds of innocent people. Not just watching, actually doing the killing. And this is considered entertaining by the people that play it. Surely you could see why this is pretty disgusting to non gamers?

I partially agree that it could be damaging, but I do think they are overreacting a lot. There are worse things to worry about when it comes to a childs upbringing (bad parenting for one).

One problem I see with COD is that a parent might look at the box, see the 18 rating and think "oh it's probably gory. Just playing soldiers" and still buy it for them, thinking that gore isn't a problem when it's actually the more subtle adult content that warrants the rating (Moral dilemmas that kids are too young to understand. Adult situations I suppose you'd call it).



Not entirely sure I've explained my views well, but hopefully you get the gist.

Time and time again this thread comes around and its nice to see someone who has a different opinion. Kudos to you.

Its true. Parents are too lazy to care, or just don't care at all (it'll shut them up so I can get peace for a few hours) So they do things, that if they had put thought or research into, may not have happened.

I do think its partially games, but mostly the personality of the gamer. If you are a bit mentally unstable its not gonna help, but most relatively normal adults can control themselves enough not to go out and kill people like they saw in the video games.

I suppose you could almost consider the "mentally unstable" (very hard to find a suitable word for this) to be almost like children.

[Goafer]

I think the main danger is people getting hold of these sort of games before they've been taught "right and wrong". If you already have a good sense of it, these sort of games won't really have an effect. If you get this sort of game when you're still learning what's right and wrong, it could lead to problems. Even the best parents would have a nightmare of a time telling kids that bad behaviour is wrong when games like this are almost making it seem ok. And like I said, some parents might buy this for their kids, not knowing exactly what makes it an 18 cert. It's an honest mistake for someone that doesn't realise that computer games contain adult scenarios nowerdays.

I don't think that games like these are ruining kids, but they certainly make the parents job harder. When the current generation grow up and have kids of their own, I think things will sort themselves out as the current generation will have a better idea of what modern games are like.

[nightwolf]

Ok, probably not. But don't you guys ever get this second thought that video games could be the cause of cognitive dissonance/deprivation? All those years of gaming we have spent... Imaging using that time doing something constructive.



..and what exactly do you propose? I spent my time climbing trees and playing video games, neither particular constructive. Its all about kids these days balancing their time rather than spending 16hours a day because their parents are too stupid to pull them off them.

Meh this argument comes round everytime a major game comes out thats particular violent. Its shocking really that people who buy their kids these games and then retort with OMFGWTFISTHIS!? don't realise that theres an 18 STICKER ON IT!

grr. How does somebody not know what an 18 means? Again IQ! Its often enough pressed upon us in the news, heck even when you go to the cinema! :hmm:

[Dan Dare]

I reckon most ciritcs of gaming fail to appreciate the fundamental disconnect between gamer and on screen actions. It's very rare that a game is well made enough to cause genuine emotional repsonse to violence on screen.

Interestingly enough- I only note this happening twice but both in the last 2 years.

the first was GTA 4: The new animation suite from Lucasarts (forget the name) produced some genuinely unsettling deaths. One in particular struck me as particularly gruesome and from that point on I chose to limit the amount of violence I caused throughout the game.

and MW2 was unsettling. Not just the Airport (which, aside from being in the worst plot ever and totally out of place, was rather good) but a number of scripted, motion captured execution deaths were deeply unpleasant.

That said- I've watched films with many, many more violent deaths and non of them have made me a psycho either. Winner.

[nightwolf]

Thats because you're a stable, intelligent individual Dan :P, like most of us on here!

[Dan Dare]

I do think the violent content has to peak sooner or later though. I mean, with the rising fidelity of the technology involved, you simply can't take the act of shooting someone in the face to the point where it genuinely looks realistic.


Also, I'd like to think we all fancy something a bit more demanding from our hobby at some point.

[EEVILMURRAY]

On BBC 1 now, dunno what program it is now.

All arisen from the infamous airport scene in COD MW2. Actually not all one sided as you would expect. There are a few religious people kicking off but also a priest who plays World of Warcraft.
What is this airport scene you speak of? I've heard nothing about it sadly.

[Cube]

What is this airport scene you speak of? I've heard nothing about it sadly.

It's a very fun and satisfying scene where you mow down hundreds of people at an Airport.

[Pit-Jr]

It depends on what is meant by 'damaging to society'.

On the one hand, if someone is spending alot of time playing videogames, they aren't out causing trouble, slaying civilians, damaging the environment, etc.

On the other hand, videogames and the internet in general are a bane to family/social time, physical fitness, and dare i say, the economy. I can honestly say id be in better shape physically, financially, and socially if videogames were taken out of my schedule/budget.

And of course, videogames will desensitize and influence the occasional nutjob to do something incredibly stupid.

[Shorty]

Ah, well, the fact is that the question has indeed been raised in regards to film and music. I don't know about books.Yes, books were originally considered damaging to society too. People would claim that those who read books were lost in fantasy worlds, escaping reality and not being useful to society. Now people will say "why do you play so many computer games? Why can't you go read a good book?" but once upon a time it was "why do you read so many books? you should be out finding a husband" etc.


That mission in MW2 is pretty damn twisted. Jack Bauer wouldn't have let that shit happen.

[uəʌəsʎɐɾ]

Dan; you are talking about the "can videogames make you cry?" type level of emotional involvement with a game. It's an illegitimate argument to try and deny that games are a positive anger outlet, so while they aren't (yet?) able to manipulate our feelings as much as a book or a movie (I think all that button pressing uses up all the vital parts of our brain for that :P), they're still trying very hard to involve us at such a level.

Goafer; that's a bit of a cop-out, though. You're almost saying that the uproar is fine, because it's up to the game creators to inform the audience an 18 certificate means it is only suitable for 18 year olds. The entire certification system is in place to forgo any such liability.

As a kid I was allowed to watch 18-rated movies only if my parents had watched it already. That parents don't do the same with a game, especially when it comes labelled with the same 18 circle thing is not the creator's fault. If it comes down to a lack of informed parental guidance, then that should be the focus of any such show on teh subject.

To interject myself- Dan, you mention playing a game so violent that you didn't want to re-enact such a scene... well there are plenty of movies that offer teh same visceral experience. Your anecdote only serves to further point out thatthe game has an 18 certificate.

As for teh actual topic question thing; if someone ever blames a game/movie/book/song for their actions then you can fairly safely say that they were waiting for the right trigger to behave as they did, and that if it wasn't this source-of-entertainment today, it may well be that s-o-e tomorrow. If video games were really harmful, we'd be living in a world where fight-club meets battle royale, only, I suppose, a bit more referential to games I guess.

[Pookiablo]

I think it's parents who are to blame for this - so many kids came into work over the weekend with their parents picking up Modern Warfare 2 for 'em and you can't do fuck all about it. Now, I'm not saying that parents shouldn't be allowed the freedom to decide what their kids play, but age limits are there for a reason. I think it's a case of parents actually finding out what's in these games and furthermore, determining if their kids are mature enough to be playing them. I imagine a lot of us have played games that we were not originally old enough for, so it's a bit hypocritical to suggest that these ratings are a law that must be abided by. Technically they are law, and they apply to everyone, but unfortunately not everyone is the same. I think this is more to do with maturity than age. The one thing I find to be most effective about these laws is that the games can't be bought by those underage themselves in most cases, which helps in preventing parents from at least being aware that such a title has been bought. Older siblings and friends doesn't help lol.

I got Perfect Dark when it was released back in 2000, which as we know, was rated 18, and I would've only been 13 at the time. Knowing that I stood no chance in hell of getting it, due it's absurdly overrated rating, I campaigned to mother and father to see if I could convince them to get it for me. The first thing they did was ask me, what the game was about, why it had such a high rating, what you did in it, and was there anything else that it could be compared to. After fulfilling their criteria they seemed happy enough to get it for me, and thankfully mother had read an article that had said that the game was rated a bit too highly. They did their research and they deemed me sensible enough to play it and not be affected by its content.

Some parents just don't know what's in games, or rather, they do but they don't realise that young kids could be influenced by these things and even worse try to imitate things from them. Jesus, if your gonna buy the fucking thing, read the box, see a review, ask a store clerk instead of being a goddamn loser.

Goafer made a point about seeing it from the other side - I can see an outsider's point of view (MW2 was an example) but I don't agree with it - terrorism is a serious issue in society today thanks to 9/11 and I see nothing wrong in elements of it being portrayed in the media, just like it is in films such as The Baader-Meinhof Complex, for it has cultural and even educational elements. People know terrorism is a horrid thing, the level in MW2 is not portrayed in a distasteful or entertaining way - it's pretty fucking brutal and it gives a fairly honest view of terrorism. People with a brain will certainly see these aspects of it - kids who are still growing and learning will probably not. It is ridiculous to even begin to argue that games can be used to train people to become terrorists - it is not a terrorist simulator that teaches you the core aspects of what is needed to be a terrorist - it's just painting a picture of how a terrorist event might happen or unfold, much like terrorism has been portrayed in other media for some time.

[King_V]

..and what exactly do you propose?

Spend it on maths equations, or learn a new trade... You know, something towards helping your current condition in life or for the benefit of mankind.

[Rummy]

I haven't read all posts, long things. My friend is doing her psych PhD in videogames or something, I might ask her about it, though she only started a month or two ago(I may also rope you all in for studies :D).


Anyway, my mum pretty much never let me have any age rated games as a kid, I was the one loser who never got Perfect Dark because I was 13/14(thought I was older!) and it was an 18, apparently. I coulda sworn it was a 15. Maybe that was a lie I told to convince my mother. Sum up that point, I used to act a bit mental, more so than my peers, despite not having or being exposed to this age limited content, so that's one thing.


Second, some parents don't understand game rating systems, ok the BBFC one should be pretty obvious yeah, but like(as I think someone said)...they'd be thinking 'how can an 18 game be as bad as a film? It's just a game'. If little Timmy wants that game too, and he's a half smart kid, he'll be lying out of his teeth to his mother about it. He knows about it, she doesn't, he presents a believeable story; that'll win over some parents to buy it. Whiny little shits are rewarded for whining all the time, 'oh how bad could one little game really be *gives to Timmy so he'll stfu*'.


The other thing is of course, the one in a million chance. That one in a million who IS a mentalist, waiting for their mentalisms to be unlocked by some crazy ass game. Nobody cares about the 999,999 people who don't go out and murder the fuck out of their school, they didn't make it into the news. Not so little anymore Timmy the Tearaway has. The question is though...is this one person's misdemeanours acceptable just because 999,999 other kids didn't go crazy and shoot up their school?

[Eenuh]

Spend it on maths equations, or learn a new trade... You know, something towards helping your current condition in life or for the benefit of mankind.

People need hobbies as well though, stuff to do in your free time to sit down and relax. Videogames are my hobby, they're what I play in between all my work to try and relax a bit. You can't expect people to be productive 24 hours a day.

[Fierce_LiNk]

People need hobbies as well though, stuff to do in your free time to sit down and relax. Videogames are my hobby, they're what I play in between all my work to try and relax a bit. You can't expect people to be productive 24 hours a day.

That's exactly what I was going to post, haha.

I think there are many positive aspects of gaming that get overlooked. They can be a great way of "immersing yourself" within an imaginery world, or within a story. Eternal Darkness on the Gamecube is one fine example of this. It was immersive and quite cinematic. Games can be just as immersive as films or books can be. There have been so many games in the past where I have just lost myself within them, and I think that's a good thing for the mind.

Another aspect is the social gaming side of things. Inviting friends around and playing some multiplayer games together, or playing over the internet. It's two different methods of communication and I think it's good to have a balance of both. I love having a few friends over and enjoying some games with them, and it is really a great way to spend your spare time.

As for violent games, really I think it depends on the game in question. Like films, each game is individual and they bring different things to the table. Looking in my collection, I don't have many violent games, but then I think there are varying degrees of violence. I looked at this subject for a module at Uni, and we pondered why something such as Lord of the Rings was more acceptable than a War game or film. Generally, if the "things" being killed are not human, then we see it as ok. I wonder how many of these targetted "violent games" have featured characters being killed which were not humans. I would hazard a guess and say not many.

Just a word of warning, I typed this post whilst watching Dude, Where's My Car and talking to ViPeR/Joe about Alien Versus Predator. It probably doesn't make sense and seems half hearted. If it does, I has an excuses.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

The world is already darn violent without games, movies, etc. And when talking stuff that is damaging to society, we might as well remove most stuff in the world. We cannot run around and try to hide everything that is bad or potentially harmful in the world. Instead, we need to more properly inform people so they can handle these potentially dangerous objects safely.

I'm tired and may not make complete sense. Panda with me.

[King_V]

People need hobbies as well though, stuff to do in your free time to sit down and relax. Videogames are my hobby, they're what I play in between all my work to try and relax a bit. You can't expect people to be productive 24 hours a day.

But that's what boys are there for ;) (and by boys I mean men or the sex whom one prefers - so no pedo)

in a seriousness though, when we wake up 50-something tired and bored, are we going to look back and say "ah man, those were some crazy Brawl sessions back then...those were the days") or are we going to try to figure where all those years of unconstructiveness went?

I know at this stage I'm sounding a bit retarded and robotic, but I really do get this feeling after spending so much time on games... Meh, I don't know...

[Fierce_LiNk]

But that's what boys are there for ;) (and by boys I mean men or the sex whom one prefers - so no pedo)

in a seriousness though, when we wake up 50-something tired and bored, are we going to look back and say "ah man, those were some crazy Brawl sessions back then...those were the days") or are we going to try to figure where all those years of unconstructiveness went?

I know at this stage I'm sounding a bit retarded and robotic, but I really do get this feeling after spending so much time on games... Meh, I don't know...

Does that mean you'll look back in 50 years time and say "oh, all those films were pointless", too? When you think about those Brawl sessions, why not look at it from the "Wow, I had some great times with my friends when I was younger." I know I will.

[MoogleViper]

Video games definitely do influence people. The other day I was driving down the road and I had the urge to throw a turtle at the car in front.




Now I'm banned from the local pet shop.

[Eenuh]

But that's what boys are there for ;) (and by boys I mean men or the sex whom one prefers - so no pedo)

in a seriousness though, when we wake up 50-something tired and bored, are we going to look back and say "ah man, those were some crazy Brawl sessions back then...those were the days") or are we going to try to figure where all those years of unconstructiveness went?

I know at this stage I'm sounding a bit retarded and robotic, but I really do get this feeling after spending so much time on games... Meh, I don't know...

Boys are there to game with? I agree!

Anyway, I don't feel like I'm wasting my time by playing games. You can say the same about anything else you do, like sleeping, internet, books, films, music... You can't label a hobby as a waste of time as long as you enjoy doing it and aren't harming anyone in doing it. A waste of time would be staring at a wall all day or something. Or thinking back "ahhhh I wasted so much time on games". If you feel you waste your time on games, then you should stop playing them. But for me, they're a fun entertainment and I'm not going to regret playing them. Actually, I hope that when I'm 50 something, I still play games on a regular basis!

[King_V]

I think for me, gaming has probably made me into an atrociously competitive person, and maybe a little bit more sinister.

When I play a game like command and conquer, I quiet naturally turn into the "I'm gonna fucking pwn you guy"... And that feeling is a weird but nice sexual to predatory feeling.

I'm just 'fannying' around here, I just can't fathom what type of contribution gaming has had on my life that's worth mentioning or worth the time and money.

Taekwondo makes me fit and agile, work gives me money and new friends, sleep restores my health and gives me dreams, even the unproductive act of safe sex has it's benefits... Again sorry if I seem robotic, but I am just urged to do most things with a purpose.

[\some humour]

Does that mean you'll look back in 50 years time and say "oh, all those films were pointless", too? When you think about those Brawl sessions, why not look at it from the "Wow, I had some great times with my friends when I was younger." I know I will.

I guess you're right, though i haven't been to the cinema since I've been single... I DUNNO... I'm just a sad F.

[Fierce_LiNk]

I think for me, gaming has probably made me into an atrociously competitive person, and maybe a little bit more sinister.

When I play a game like command and conquer, I quiet naturally turn into the "I'm gonna fucking pwn you guy"... And that feeling is a weird but nice sexual to predatory feeling.

I'm just 'fannying' around here, I just can't fathom what type of contribution gaming has had on my life that's worth mentioning or worth the time and money.

Taekwondo makes me fit and agile, work gives me money and new friends, sleep restores my health and gives me dreams, even the unproductive act of safe sex has it's benefits... Again sorry if I seem robotic, but I am just urged to do most things with a purpose.

[\some humour]

The purpose of games really is just to have fun and enjoy yourself. But, sometimes it can be a bit more than that. It can be a good way of relieving stress. When I feel a bit pissed off, I like putting a game on to cheer me up. The same thing happens with my guitar, when I feel a bit lifeless, I pick that up and it breathes some new life into me, haha.

There is a purpose there, I think you just need to find it. In the end, what is purpose? What is the point of earning money or keeping fit? Two things are very certain in life: You are born and then, eventually, you die. When you're close to the end, you won't look back and think "damn, I wasted all those years keeping fit or earning money." There will be good memories attached to it, hopefully. When I pick up a guitar, I don't do it because it is there, I do it because I "want" to play, and I do it because I want to express myself or listen to the music. The same could be said for games, it's a way of keeping yourself entertained and it can be a form of expression.

I think you need a hug, King_Vagina.

[uəʌəsʎɐɾ]

My xbox360 collection is made up of nearly entirely 18-rated games.

Flink; you say that different violent movies bring different violence to the table -- I say that the difference is irrelevent. The point is that parents don't think games are equally disturbing or obscene as movies are. I thus suggest that we let parents make their mistakes, and then let them learn from it. They only have themselves to blame.

Personally, working where I do, I've declined the sale of not only MW2, but also pretty much a billion games to customers because they've been unable to show proof. Sometimes I've even had to decline to give them the game even though they've already paid for it, because they don't have proof of age. So long as the game makers and the game retailers are upholding the law, then there simply is no argument at all. Those responsible for the protection of younger people's minds should really step the fuck up and do their jobs.

But seriously - did anyone see the show in question?

[King_V]

I think you need a hug, King_Vagina.

and a few prison biatches with strap-ons... I just... Don't know anymore lol. Life gets boring or fucked up and I guess teh games are the first line of defence.

I think the best way to determine this question is to ask ourselves how gaming has impacted our lives, character etc

[mcj metroid]

I think society is holding videogames back... First of all i'm of the opinion videogames need rebranding, I watched a video on this and it's a very good argument when you see how seriously taken graphic novels were taken.

but imagine how videogames could be used to help children... in school or in classes. but no society shuns them..

[Emasher]

Why not use games for conditioning (example: When we spray dogs with water when they're bad, or give them a treat if they're good to train them). Have games were you're actually punished for doing something bad, for instance, if you kill a civilian it gives you a game over (just a simple example). While, I'm not saying games should all be like this, in fact, I wouldn't want most to be. Why not make games that actually subconsciously train children to be good people, and let them have fun while doing it?

[Iun]

Why not make games that actually subconsciously train children to be good people, and let them have fun while doing it?

Because EXACTLY the same people who said videogames are violent and you shouldn't be allowed to play them will subsequently get outraged and say "You can't control people, it's WRONG!"

And while explaining irony to the masses gives me a bellyache, their bitching is something I can tune out.

[uəʌəsʎɐɾ]

and a few prison biatches with strap-ons... I just... Don't know anymore lol. Life gets boring or fucked up and I guess teh games are the first line of defence.

I think the best way to determine this question is to ask ourselves how gaming has impacted our lives, character etc
Ok. I would say videogames haven't impacted my life at all, beyond the videogame's sister that is the internet. Gaming hasn't notably altered my character, but it has been the ultimate common ground for many of us as we journeyed through the netosphere. It's like blaming weed for crack addiction - while there's a tenuous link, there's really no strong correlation.
I think society is holding videogames back... First of all i'm of the opinion videogames need rebranding, I watched a video on this and it's a very good argument when you see how seriously taken graphic novels were taken.

but imagine how videogames could be used to help children... in school or in classes. but no society shuns them..
Where I work we sell a lot of edutainment games. There are actually several platforms (two main ones -- v-tech and leapfrog) that have a lot of big-brand names who release games that promote both gaming experience as well as, well, learning. I may be mistaken but I think disney have a stake in v-tech, and as such they release a lot of pixar-related games to encourage positive thinking in small children, or whatever.

Gaming really has come a long way, even if you just concentrate on this area. Here lies space for further discussion.
Why not use games for conditioning (example: When we spray dogs with water when they're bad, or give them a treat if they're good to train them). Have games were you're actually punished for doing something bad, for instance, if you kill a civilian it gives you a game over (just a simple example). While, I'm not saying games should all be like this, in fact, I wouldn't want most to be. Why not make games that actually subconsciously train children to be good people, and let them have fun while doing it?

A) because gaming is supposed to be escapism; It is better to let a nutter kill in-game if it means they're less likely to commit the same act in reality. The subconscious aspect is, as I said, a part of the edutainment sector, which is booming more than you realise (seeing as you're not a kid/parent). Partly, we have nintendo to thank for this, due to their mass-appeal, gaming-does-more-than-entertain (it makes you smarter and fitter!) mentality.

That our entire lives are subconscious manipulations is definitely a debate for another topic.

[Emasher]

I was more just thinking teaching kids life lessons and stuff, the example I gave wasn't the best example for what I was actually trying to say. But you're right, its a different topic entirely.

[Coolness Bears]

But aquaman you cannot marry a woman without gills!

OH I'VE WASTED MY LIFE.

On the topic of videogames making society violent. No they are not.

Also in terms of what videogames contribute to my life? I have no idea but I don't look back. I only move forwards, at the age of 60 or whatever I don't want to be saying "Oh where has my life gone" but keep enjoying myself until I die. Thinking about regrets that I cannot change will get me nowhere. :)

[Chris the great]

Can anyone else see the non gamers point of view on this? Try and look at it from an outsiders point of view. A new game has come out where one section involves you actually taking part in murdering hundreds of innocent people. Not just watching, actually doing the killing. And this is considered entertaining by the people that play it. Surely you could see why this is pretty disgusting to non gamers?



i think this is were the problem for most of us comes from. people who don't really understand the medium are the ones criticising it. its like in the mail a few months ago, a colomist did a page long rant about how wrong the film antichrist was, despite never having seen it. i presonaly get annoyed by the cirticism of violent games because i feel like they are being seen as an easy target by people who need a scape goat.


Its true. Parents are too lazy to care, or just don't care at all (it'll shut them up so I can get peace for a few hours) So they do things, that if they had put thought or research into, may not have happened.

I do think its partially games, but mostly the personality of the gamer. If you are a bit mentally unstable its not gonna help, but most relatively normal adults can control themselves enough not to go out and kill people like they saw in the video games.

this raises two good points. firstly, parents seem to think understanding games is to difficult or way beyond them. the age rating is there, on the box like a movie, and in many cases, the conent is detailed on the back. really, gaming should be somthing parents get involved in. if your kids doing somthing, maybe look in on them, talk to them, try and understand it yourself.

secondly, the mental state of a person is everything. remeber a few years ago, there was a run of killings in which the killer emulated the matrix? it was a strange run of events, but id argue that f it hadnt been the matrix, somthing else would have inspired them. people simply dont watch a film and decide to kill people.

I do think the violent content has to peak sooner or later though. I mean, with the rising fidelity of the technology involved, you simply can't take the act of shooting someone in the face to the point where it genuinely looks realistic.


why not? movies do it all the timeive read books that were horrificly violent, and often, its sickening, you dont want to be involved in violence like that.



i think the main problem is people fail to see that everything in games dosent have to be fun. playing wolrd at war last christmas, i was doing a mission involving dissabling japanise anti air fire, towards the end of the mission i managed to capture an AA gun, and turned it down the trenches, the ferocity of the level had actualy gotten to me, id dare say i was probebly gritting my teeth in an agressive manner at the time. as the smoke cleared and i survayed what i had done, i saw piles of dead enemy soilders, litteraly blown appart and mutilated by the bullets. i was shocked, i felt sick and even a little ashamed of my self for what i hade done. it wasnt enjoyable, it wasnt gratifying, it was almost moving, and why not?

do people watch the pianist or schindlers list to enjoy the crulety of man? no, most people dont. why cant games have this? recent advances in the gaming industry have revolutionised story telling. alot of games are becoming tragic, even poingient. to view gaming as a simply entertainment based medium is an outdated view, perhaps people should consider that extreeme violence in games is ment to elicit an emotional response, not necicarily joy.

[Portlett]

does anyone know waht program this was on so I can watch it on iplayer?

[uəʌəsʎɐɾ]

I was rude. Edited.

[Dan Dare]

why not? movies do it all the timeive read books that were horrificly violent, and often, its sickening, you dont want to be involved in violence like that.



i think the main problem is people fail to see that everything in games dosent have to be fun. playing wolrd at war last christmas, i was doing a mission involving dissabling japanise anti air fire, towards the end of the mission i managed to capture an AA gun, and turned it down the trenches, the ferocity of the level had actualy gotten to me, id dare say i was probebly gritting my teeth in an agressive manner at the time. as the smoke cleared and i survayed what i had done, i saw piles of dead enemy soilders, litteraly blown appart and mutilated by the bullets. i was shocked, i felt sick and even a little ashamed of my self for what i hade done. it wasnt enjoyable, it wasnt gratifying, it was almost moving, and why not?

do people watch the pianist or schindlers list to enjoy the crulety of man? no, most people dont. why cant games have this? recent advances in the gaming industry have revolutionised story telling. alot of games are becoming tragic, even poingient. to view gaming as a simply entertainment based medium is an outdated view, perhaps people should consider that extreeme violence in games is ment to elicit an emotional response, not necicarily joy.


Well that's kind of what I was getting at. Lets just say that in five years time, we have near-as-dammit photo realism and top draw animation to go with it. At this point, do you really want to be palying Modern Warfare 9 where headshots look like actual headshots? I can't see myself thinking 'man this shotgun is satisfying!' when it blows a guy in half in the most realistic way technonlogy allows it to.
My point is that by that point, and hopefully before, we can say gaming will have matured creatively enough to move past the fairly basic and absurd cycle of violence and mindless killing and use that technology to make it so that if we do kill people in games, it should be as shocking and effective as the violence in (good) films and books that give you a mature and deep emotional response.

[Rummy]

I think not playing videogames is harmful to our society. Would Jack the Ripper have been doing his ripping if he'd played more Xbox360? I think not. It's clear that a large majority of these famous murderers don't have an obsessive gaming addiction, and I think that's just the problem with it all, really.

NOT PLAYING VIDEO GAMES MAKES YOU A MENTALIST.


FACT.

[nightwolf]

Spend it on maths equations, or learn a new trade... You know, something towards helping your current condition in life or for the benefit of mankind.

Sorry its taken me so long to get back to this, I rarely remember that I post in threads like these because half the time I write something then never put it in because it doesn't seem to get my point across.

I genuinely believe I would have a miserable exsistance if I did math equations instead of playing games...why? Because I 'suck' at maths and frankly I'm in education already learning complex programming, modelling and animation. My current life is not defined by a game, or several, its not the be all and end all of my hobbies as I'm sure alot of people on here are the same.

I don't particularly thing if I can't do divisions without a calculator that I'll help man kind any other way than to make said video games that are being talked about already. HEH :grin:

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Well that's kind of what I was getting at. Lets just say that in five years time, we have near-as-dammit photo realism and top draw animation to go with it. At this point, do you really want to be palying Modern Warfare 9 where headshots look like actual headshots? I can't see myself thinking 'man this shotgun is satisfying!' when it blows a guy in half in the most realistic way technonlogy allows it to.
My point is that by that point, and hopefully before, we can say gaming will have matured creatively enough to move past the fairly basic and absurd cycle of violence and mindless killing and use that technology to make it so that if we do kill people in games, it should be as shocking and effective as the violence in (good) films and books that give you a mature and deep emotional response.
I have a feeling there would still be a market for it. Think SAW.

[Wesley]

Games are awful and do damage society.

I'm just trying to get into the gaming industry to kill the beast from within.

[Chris the great]

on sunday, the express ran an article claiming gaming was a terrible blight on young men, with no bennefits, no social side and is alienating us.

i honestly cringed. firstly, can you imagine a more social hobby then gaming? how many forums are there? how many clans? how many friends lend each outher games, chat about them, share tips, or get toghetr to play before a night out.

the woman writting said that videogames anrt even propper games like rugby, as they dont involve interaction with outher people. maybe 5 years ago she had a point but today? playign resi 5 with a mate was unbelivable. we organised plans, we had a banter, i got teased about ym accuracy, i teased my mate for seemingly attracting death, there were mad arguments in gun fights, hurried advice in close calls, and slightly awkward thank you's after truly awsome saves. if that isnt social, then what is?

as for sitting idoly, im sorry, but while you sit watching dross on the telly what am i doing? im actulay thinking. take a fairly standard first person shooter, typicaly, your looking for cover, keeping tabs on ammo, enemy numbers and rough positions, reacting to a changing environment and doing risk annalysis. this is in a typical scinario on typical game, while your watching the latest soap or reality tv farce, what are you doing? your watching, not even really thinking, your uninvovled, an observer.


studies have shown games to have better eyesight, quicker reactions, and in the case of surgeons, more accurate work. what does X factor offer the world? jedward. i think its clear who's entertainment is a waste of time here.

[RoadKill]

on sunday, the express ran an article claiming gaming was a terrible blight on young men, with no bennefits, no social side and is alienating us.

i honestly cringed. firstly, can you imagine a more social hobby then gaming? how many forums are there? how many clans? how many friends lend each outher games, chat about them, share tips, or get toghetr to play before a night out.

the woman writting said that videogames anrt even propper games like rugby, as they dont involve interaction with outher people. maybe 5 years ago she had a point but today? playign resi 5 with a mate was unbelivable. we organised plans, we had a banter, i got teased about ym accuracy, i teased my mate for seemingly attracting death, there were mad arguments in gun fights, hurried advice in close calls, and slightly awkward thank you's after truly awsome saves. if that isnt social, then what is?

as for sitting idoly, im sorry, but while you sit watching dross on the telly what am i doing? im actulay thinking. take a fairly standard first person shooter, typicaly, your looking for cover, keeping tabs on ammo, enemy numbers and rough positions, reacting to a changing environment and doing risk annalysis. this is in a typical scinario on typical game, while your watching the latest soap or reality tv farce, what are you doing? your watching, not even really thinking, your uninvovled, an observer.


studies have shown games to have better eyesight, quicker reactions, and in the case of surgeons, more accurate work. what does X factor offer the world? jedward. i think its clear who's entertainment is a waste of time here.

I really couldn't agree more. Absorbing bullshit TV is a genuine blight, and gaming really can be a whole lot more

[EEVILMURRAY]

Word.


Neighbours is a pr0 exception though.

[uəʌəsʎɐɾ]

I wouldn't agree that gamers have better eyesight, though. Citation needed!

[Dazz]

I wouldn't agree that gamers have better eyesight, though. Citation needed!

I kind of do. I notice things alot quicker than I used to and my reaction to things are alot faster now than they were before so I can see what christhegreat is saying.

But yeah, couldn't agree more Chris. Games are awesome, people against gaming are not.

[uəʌəsʎɐɾ]

TV monitors generally don't rely on your peripheral vision (much), and are a fixed distance from your eyes. I don't see how this can 'improve' eyesight, unless our definition of eyesight involves/is limited to how fast you can move them!

[Fierce_LiNk]

TV monitors generally don't rely on your peripheral vision (much), and are a fixed distance from your eyes. I don't see how this can 'improve' eyesight, unless our definition of eyesight involves/is limited to how fast you can move them!

I agree with you, sucker. When I'm playing a game, I notice that sometimes I can spot things a lot quicker than others. However, in general, my eyesight is poor. I'm short sighted, and therefore can't even drive without my glasses.

So, I don't think gaming improves your sight, as such. But, I think it can help you become more "aware" of things that are on the screen. So, in terms of scanning, it might help.

[Raining_again]

TV monitors generally don't rely on your peripheral vision (much), and are a fixed distance from your eyes. I don't see how this can 'improve' eyesight, unless our definition of eyesight involves/is limited to how fast you can move them!

How can anyone think that games are good for your eyesight?! moving your eyes quickly and frequently (much like typing in an office) is very bad for your eyesight, tires your eyes and the unnatural light at obscene hours (we all know you do it) is very bad for your bodies time rhythm/body clock.

reflex improvement can be practised in other ways than games

and the biggie - RSI.

I'm not an anti gamer - I'm just not kidding myself that its not good for our bodies at all.

[Chris the great]

hum, i read the article on it recently, im afraid i cant rember were. in essence, people who played games were better able to spot a slightly darker shaded spot on a white screen (it may have been moving)

i belive it was attributed to our habitual spotting of patterns.

[nightwolf]

hum, i read the article on it recently, im afraid i cant rember were. in essence, people who played games were better able to spot a slightly darker shaded spot on a white screen (it may have been moving)

i belive it was attributed to our habitual spotting of patterns.

I seriously doubt that.

If anything my eyesight has gotten worse over the years, theres actually something behind your mother telling you you'll get square eyes.

Even common sense tells you that tv/screens make you headachy and tired because of the focusing your eyes has to do.

[Raining_again]

I seriously doubt that.

If anything my eyesight has gotten worse over the years, theres actually something behind your mother telling you you'll get square eyes.

Even common sense tells you that tv/screens make you headachy and tired because of the focusing your eyes has to do.

Yeah you need to look at distances or your eyes get extremely tired because of the focusing and constant movement. H&S suggests once every 20 minutes, go out for a minute and look 20m+ away from you, out of a window or whatever.

20 minutes, 20 seconds, 20 meters.

[ipaul]

on sunday, the express ran an article claiming gaming was a terrible blight on young men, with no bennefits, no social side and is alienating us.

i honestly cringed. firstly, can you imagine a more social hobby then gaming? how many forums are there? how many clans? how many friends lend each outher games, chat about them, share tips, or get toghetr to play before a night out.

the woman writting said that videogames anrt even propper games like rugby, as they dont involve interaction with outher people. maybe 5 years ago she had a point but today? playign resi 5 with a mate was unbelivable. we organised plans, we had a banter, i got teased about ym accuracy, i teased my mate for seemingly attracting death, there were mad arguments in gun fights, hurried advice in close calls, and slightly awkward thank you's after truly awsome saves. if that isnt social, then what is?

as for sitting idoly, im sorry, but while you sit watching dross on the telly what am i doing? im actulay thinking. take a fairly standard first person shooter, typicaly, your looking for cover, keeping tabs on ammo, enemy numbers and rough positions, reacting to a changing environment and doing risk annalysis. this is in a typical scinario on typical game, while your watching the latest soap or reality tv farce, what are you doing? your watching, not even really thinking, your uninvovled, an observer.


studies have shown games to have better eyesight, quicker reactions, and in the case of surgeons, more accurate work. what does X factor offer the world? jedward. i think its clear who's entertainment is a waste of time here.

A shitty conservative tabloid like the Express is always bound to attack video games. The Guardian, Independent or even the Times are always a lot more balanced when they write about them, The Guardian in particular with Charlie Brooker there. I think people generally know not to trust newspapers anyway, apart from their most loyal readers.

[Chris the great]

I seriously doubt that.

If anything my eyesight has gotten worse over the years, theres actually something behind your mother telling you you'll get square eyes.

Even common sense tells you that tv/screens make you headachy and tired because of the focusing your eyes has to do.

it wasnt necicarily more clear vision, just better at spotting said thing. also, the article didnt say how long was spent on aveage gaming by each person.

A shitty conservative tabloid like the Express is always bound to attack video games. The Guardian, Independent or even the Times are always a lot more balanced when they write about them, The Guardian in particular with Charlie Brooker there. I think people generally know not to trust newspapers anyway, apart from their most loyal readers.

true, it seems many papers are getting behind gaming now, but theres still a lot of negative press behind gaming.

[Mundi]

The whole eyesight thing, is not the better hand to eye co-ordination?

[Chris the great]

The whole eyesight thing, is not the better hand to eye co-ordination?

not according to said article, though i suppose thats a far better argument.

[Dan Dare]

speaking of the press:

brewed up some musings on the old keyboard about MW2, controversy and the impact on creativity in the industry. It might be shit, so before I submit it to anyone that matters...

The controversy surrounding Modern Warfare 2 highlights the problems facing a young creative industry.
There’s a scene in the new Modern Warfare game that opens with a darkened screen and the sound of safety catches being released. As the images fade in, lift doors open and the player, armed with a heavy machine gun, takes part in a terrorist attack in a airport and is given the option to massacre swathes unarmed civilians in a scene deliberately evocative of the recent attacks in Mumbai.
The violence is indiscriminate, brutal and lingering. Rightly so, the scene is immensely shocking. I played through it with a growing sense of revulsion at my own actions that I have never felt before playing videogames- and I’ve been playing them since the early nineties. That’s more or less since I could pick up a controller.
The scene has created a now predictable storm of controversy on its release on TV, radio and in the papers. Given the 18+ age rating on the game, it should be easy to scoff at moral crusaders campaigning against the game, but I was sharply reminded of the issues involved when, playing the game online over X-Box Live, I was subjected to a frankly astonishing torrent of abuse from what must have been a pre pubescent boy of about 12 or 13.
Quite apart from my amazement that this kid, whose age was easily identified by a definite pre ball- dropping vocal pitch, knew the words he was using, I was conscious that I definitely wouldn’t want him experiencing the same violent content I had in the single player game but clearly his parents didn’t care or, more likely, simply didn’t know what the game was about. No child that age could walk in to a shop and buy Modern Warfare 2, but an adult who was buying it for him would have no trouble- And that’s the real problem: here. While developers like Infinity Ward are attempting to push the envelope and do new things with gaming for adults, public perception of the industry from parents, government and even its own specialist retailers like Game and Gamestation, remains stuck in the mid nineties when I was still tempted to chew on the SNES pads and Amiga 500 keyboard. Just this week, MP Keith Vaz attacked Modern Warfare 2 for damaging the impressionable minds of youngsters. Of course, Mr Vaz’s spectacular display of shit stirring ambulance chasing failed to take note of the game’s 18 rating and intended adult audience
This preconception is now comically out of date and has been since it was founded on the lunch-boxing promotional drives behind Mario and Sonic working their pixelated identities in to the public conscious, but it remains all the same- and it’s damaging the industry in a big way. If parents buy games like Modern Warfare 2 for their kids, if retailers continue to enable these ill educated shoppers as they do now and especially if the establishment continues to attack the industry for content clearly aimed at mature adults, then what chance does the industry have of maturing in the future? By belittling the industry, critics are simply enforcing negative stereotyping and making things worse, not better. Why, for example, would talented novelists and screenwriters be attracted to working in gaming when the industry is frequently demonised and portrayed as little better than pornography?
Sadly, the comparison is not entirely unsuitable. Like porn, videogame scripting is often merely an excuse to move from one set piece to another with little regard for logic or story. Even Modern warfare 2, with a Hollywood grade budget capable of ending third world debt, lacks the story craft to fully justify the inclusion of its most shocking scenes.
It’s a start though, and once society allows the videogame industry to move away from juvenile stereotypes by letting developers make mature content for mature gamers and keeping that material out of the hands of youngsters it was never intended to reach. Maybe then we can establish a creative platform for the industry on par with film and television and start making something really quite interesting.

[Daft]

No Russian was a stupid level. This is a snippet what I wrote about controversy in videogames in relation to it.

Now we come to the big controversy, the level ‘No Russian’. Wow, the very name sends shivers down my spine.

“Modern Warfare 2’s big attention-grabbing setpiece is a terrorist atrocity in an airport in which the player (taking the role of an undercover agent) reluctantly takes part. It’s upsetting, chilling and horrifying.

You’re supposed to be upset and chilled and horrified, of course – so on that level it succeeds.”

There are times when some games are horrifying, the whole second half of Resident Evil 5, for example. To quote Yahtzee’s succinct observation, ‘RE5 actually does a lot to defer that accusation [of racism]. Your partner is black (a bit), quite a few whiteys are scattered throughout the early hordes, and real effort has been put into a somewhat realistic and sympathetic depiction of modern Africa. And then… Halfway through the game, we suddenly find ourselves in a succession of mud hut villages fighting crowds of jabbering black people in loincloths and war paint, chucking spears. Oh, dears. Talk about sidestepping a pothole only to fall off a bridge.’

‘No Russian’ is not one of these horrifying moments simply because of how utterly absurd it is. Not only is it an unnecessary playable part of an already spasmodic plot that Infinity Ward and Activision obviously green lighted to drum up a storm, but the people you massacre are so inhuman. Point at any one of your team mates in the game and their name will be displayed quite clearly along with their rank. Enemies are afforded no such luxury; it’s an act of dehumanisation. Likewise these gunned down civilians are inhuman fodder. The only thing remotely human is their appearance but if you’ve just been killing your way through the Russian army all afternoon, what’s another couple hundred of no-names? ‘No Russian’ could have been horrifying. It could have been mature and done evocatively.

Even structurally it is removed. You step out of a lift into a room of people and kill them. It is a glorified shooting range. There is no build up or context. There is no tension, nothing is precious, nothing is lost. Have build up, give the people names, allow a context and you’ll have that controversial and, most importantly, thought-provoking level.

To be blunt, I think you have to be a bit of an idiot to see 'No Russian' as horrifying. Don't get me wrong, it's a stupid level for the reasons stated above, but it's just absurd.

[uəʌəsʎɐɾ]

Crit, dan;

- and I’ve been playing them since the early nineties. That’s more or less since I could pick up a controller. I think you should find another way to express your veteran status - perhaps rather than focusing on your own ga-ga age focus on the age of the medium itself, add a bit of hyperbole to exaggerate the point (like "- and I've been playing since pacman was on acid eating ghosts" or something. Emphasises your controller-chewing statement later).

shit-stirring ambulance-chasing, otherwise i'm picturing an ambulance chasing Failed while stirring some shit and taking notes. Maybe it's just me.

Your comparison of videogames to pornography is worthy of expanded attention, otherwise it kinda comes across as a fairly ludicrous statement to make.

Daft; I dislike your need to cling to a more reknowned critic to make your point, and I don't think that point particularly backs up what you're trying to say about dehumanisation and the absurd (maybe an element of the absurd :P)

Sorry for the unasked crit.

My centicles; on Dead Space I was stamping on the bodies of dead people in order to get a dismemberment achievement. I thought it was funny at first, then it started making me feel a little disturbed. But once you go full-blown disturbed then it's alright, because you're laughing like a maniac with a key to the straightjacket.

EDIT: tbf daft, you did say snippet. Sorry again!

[EEVILMURRAY]

I kind of do. I notice things alot quicker than I used to and my reaction to things are alot faster now than they were before so I can see what christhegreat is saying.
How has your eyesight come along though?
Point at any one of your team mates in the game and their name will be displayed quite clearly along with their rank. Enemies are afforded no such luxury; it’s an act of dehumanisation.
Are you saying it's wrong that your character doesn't know what name his enemy is?

Because unless every person in every war we've had knew each name and rank of the person s/he was shooting at, I fail to see what your point is.

[Daft]

Are you saying it's wrong that your character doesn't know what name his enemy is?

Because unless every person in every war we've had knew each name and rank of the person s/he was shooting at, I fail to see what your point is.

No, I'm saying it dehumanises the enemy. War needs an 'otherness'. Whether it is wrong or right in the real world is neither here nor there because this is a game (they obviously aren't the same thing so it's just incredibly silly to make that direct a comparison), a piece of role play. My point is that the people in the airport are inhuman and thus are more similar to the enemy than any of your team mates who you'd probably be more attached to.

I'd go into it more but I need sleep so I'm going to have to leave you with just that.

Daft; I dislike your need to cling to a more reknowned critic to make your point, and I don't think that point particularly backs up what you're trying to say about dehumanisation and the absurd (maybe an element of the absurd :P)

Sorry for the unasked crit.

My centicles; on Dead Space I was stamping on the bodies of dead people in order to get a dismemberment achievement. I thought it was funny at first, then it started making me feel a little disturbed. But once you go full-blown disturbed then it's alright, because you're laughing like a maniac with a key to the straightjacket.

EDIT: tbf daft, you did say snippet. Sorry again!

It's from a much longer review which originally was going to be much much shorter. I only quoted Brooker because I usually agree with him but this time I didn't. My point was that I don't agree that it's horrifying because, simply put, the level is not well thought out enough.

Unless you're talking about the Yahtzee quote, in which case, I just like that quote and it conveys problems that a lot of gamers decide to shrug off.

I've never played Dead Space but from the sounds of it that activity lasted longer than the five minutes 'No Russian' took. 'No Russian' is a unique mission in the game and should really have much more impact than something that you would get used to if it were available thought the game (for example, killing people in general. No one bats an eyelid).

I want to explain this better but, if I'm honest, I cannot be bothered right now. If I were up for it I'd source stuff, ethnographies and the like. I really shouldn't have posted in the first place. Sorry.

[Dan Dare]

Personally I disagree about No Russian. I found it quite unpleasant, taken in isolation. I think it's faintly absurd in the context of the plot (and criminally under used, more to the point of my ire) but as a stand alone scene it's pretty grim.

we don't agree on much though ;)

anyway, substantial re-write hit tonight. The article is a different beast and has left my hands by future-post. Thanks to all for the input.

[Chris the great]

My centicles; on Dead Space I was stamping on the bodies of dead people in order to get a dismemberment achievement. I thought it was funny at first, then it started making me feel a little disturbed. But once you go full-blown disturbed then it's alright, because you're laughing like a maniac with a key to the straightjacket.

EDIT: tbf daft, you did say snippet. Sorry again!

i was stamping on them, but for anouther reason, the horrible bats that turn them into necromorphs. it was a little bit sick, and id have hated any one watching me, but it was tactial, and i reasoned they were dead, so who cares.

[King_V]

RE: Eyesight.

You should invest in some clear, contrast lensed glasses (similar to cyclists) to avoid messing up your eyes. They're like £10 and go a long way at protecting your eyes from tv/computer screens... it is necessary unless you enjoy the prospects of having 3/4 of your pupils covered in later life.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/BOLLE-SOLIS-CONTRAST-SAFETY-CYCLING-GLASSES_W0QQitemZ110148912192QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK _BOI_ProtectiveGear_RL?hash=item19a5630440

[BlueStar]

The Fox News outrage at CoD:MW2 is hillarious. "You can play as terrorists and kill civillians!" Look, people have played games involving conflict for decades. The classic conflict is between good and evil, and if you're going to play it as a competitive game then you need someone to be the bad guys. The people moaning about this probably played Cops and Robbers, Cowboys and Indians, Japs and Commandos when they were kids. If they were on the team of the robbers or the "Japs" did that mean they were condoning criminals or Nazi sympathisers? Same with WWII board games or Civil War re-enactments, someone has to be the Nazis or the Confederates.

And then "But the terrorists kill civillians!" - how would you like terrorists to be portrayed? like the A-Team, where they pepper an airport with automatic weaponry, amazingly leaving anyone who's not in a military uniform untouched because they care about collateral damage?