Scipio - again, well said Sir.
I certainly agree that games should have content descriptions so parents know what they're buying, but beyond that, it's all down to parental discretion and supervision.
Heck, I was watching horror movies from the age of 9, and was playing Carmageddon and Duke Nukem years and years before I ever turned 18 - and I turned out fine. My parents didn't mind the content, they didn't really know much about games, but they did know I knew the difference between reality & fiction, right & wrong.
I remember when watching The Fly 2 when I was like 10 with my Dad, and he said - at the point where the guy gets crushed by the elevator (which as a special effect, I thought was awesome) - 'if that was real life, someone at the company would have to inform his family' and went on about how the mother would be widowed and the kids would be without a father - IF IT WAS REAL LIFE.
Which was a good thing actually, because although I already knew that, it's coming from someone else and you're taught about it.
I certainly had to work my way up the horror movie chain, there were certain flicks I wasn't allowed to see (like Poltergeist, for some reason) and others I snuck in and dubbed off mates and watched secretly  ...but it's all good, I'm not running around chopping people's heads off. I'm a decent young man, I respect other people, and I tow the 'do good things and good things happen' line.
My problem with this article, is she has no idea about videogames clearly, and particularly in the case of COD4, uses some alarmingly descriptive rhetoric. Everything sounds worse when someone describes it to you, especially when they focus on certain aspects rather than the other stuff.
She neglects to mention that in COD4, certain good guys die - and you feel sorry for them, or gutted that they've been killed off - she doesn't focus on the fact you're stopping world war three essentially by taking out terrorists. She neglects to mention that there are only a number of terrorist models, so you do see the same set over and over again - not exactly life like. She neglects to mention that the weapons in the game, while aiming for realism, aren't like the real things at all - something said by genuine weapons experts...because - shockingly - this isn't real, it's a videogame, which is supposed to be enjoyable to play.
These sort of morons also neglect to research the fact that most gamers thought Manhunt was boring and sh*te. I liked certain stylistic aspects of it, but beyond that it was a repetitive game with minimal world interaction.
As for the 'research' thing that somebody mentioned in the comments, there's is an equal amount of research that says violent games DON'T make you a nutter - which, when you use common sense, is the real answer. There are millions upon millions of gamers - but not millions upon millions of Agent 47's or whomever.
There was some interesting research recently which included kids playing GTA (not in the experiment, but in interviews with them), and there were answers like 'you get to try out things you'd never do in real life, or things you'd hope won't happen in real life to you or other people', they also focussed on the characters and the humour and were completely aware it's just a videogame.
These are the facts and realities of videogames these numpties like her refuse to accept. Well f*ck off, bitch, because more and more parents these days are videogamers themselves, and they know exactly what is up - and it's not what Anne Diamond is peddling.
|
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by MinionZombie
Bookmarks