The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I'm sure many of you receive it all the time, the rambling voices of complaint coming from your parents complaining that you spend too much time on computer games. But why just games? Isn't television much more of a distraction? I don't know about you, but every time I got that treatment I never felt good about it, like I had been given the responsibility to show people that gaming isn't so bad after all.
Grand Theft Auto, Unreal Tournament and State Of Emergency are all games that contain a high amount of violence and for some reason people use games like these as easy targets. They ridiculously accuse games for such mad and violent acts of young children, mainly in America, who probably had serious psychological problems already. Okay, blah blah blah, it has been tested and proven that the bad tempered aggression of humans after playing a fighting game like Soul Blade increases, but did they tell you that it was probably because the person they tested was not very good at the game and kept on losing? Well, of course they would get angry! Who wouldn't if you were forced to fight a losing battle for about an hour non-stop, in a white room closely surrounded by walls? It's enough to drive anyone insane and yes, make them more angry.
Propagand. They can majorly twist things about can't they? Take the Daily Mail for instance. Not only the fact that their bringing the issue up after two innocent people had to be killed, but now the police have realised something has to be done about gun crime and how easy it is to get hold of a weapon nowadays. Now, because of this incident, the Daily Mail found it massively neccessary to bring up an issue that happened way back where two males disputed over who won in Street Fighter, which led to violence. Why are they saying this now? Why did they not say anything sooner? Just typical. They were obviously trying to undermine gaming for what it is and that I do not agree with.
They should just give it a rest and think of a way to solve the solution rather than blaming industries. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if the papers themselves weren't to blame for violence, they talk so much rubbish. I'm very sensitive to anything that undermines gaming because they just don't know! It makes me wonder if they've actually played a game in their life? You simply have to try it before rinsing it, or else you have no case at all.
Yes, there are a lot of violent games around, but compared to films they are such a minor party. And in actual fact, games are films are pretty similar, except for the fact that you "watch" films and "play" games. When you finish watching a movie like 'Die Another Day' in the cinema, it doesn't exactly warp your mind and encourage you to pursue world domination does it? (it doesn't for me anyway) So, how much more a video game? Something so delicate and harmless created for fun and enjoyment, to benefit people. Something that began as something very small and indeed received some encouragement from businesses around it is now becoming the centre of attention for blame of too much violence in the world. You cannot be serious!
Fair enough, computer games give anyone that decides to play them thoroughly a compelling experience, but unless there is something already mentally wrong with you it doesn't just at that moment create evil and wicked thoughts in your head. It must have built up and been encouraged somehow, especially with mad hardcore bands planting evil thoughts in youngsters minds. Young minds grow with what constantly surrounds them, so games cannot really be blamed for violence. All us gamers today are proof of that. We constantly play our beloved games, but you haven't seen us rob any banks, start unnecessary fights or kill anyone. It's just not fair to pick on an industry just when it's finally starting to show true potential for the future.
I mean George Bush isn't exactly showing a good example is he? He obviously doesn't want to hear Saddam out, and just because he's ready for war he thinks he must confront countries like Iraq and North Korea about Nuclear weapons. They obviously won't use their weapons if they have no threat, unless they were mad, so why bother them? Games have also been blamed for being racist in the past and this situation with Saddam doesn't exactly soften the blow towards extremists does it? I mean come on! How can such a quality game like Hitman be brought down because of its violent content towards a particular group? It's not just that group that gets killed in the "game" is it? Other people, white, black etc are there as well. Has gaming become such an easy target? I mean, we've seen loads of games in the past that demanded you to shoot down certain people, but nobody complained. So why's everybody shouting their mouths off now? Is it because of the new human rights laws? Well, pants to human rights laws if it is!
Games (after the invention of Kung Fu) is definitely one of the best things that's ever happened to the world. It's brought people together and is one of the main reasons technology is getting better every day. If anything influenced anyone, it's films, after all, most action games nowadays get their ideas from films and in many ways try to follow films because of how successful they have become. All this racism and violence is total nonsense, and computer games are to blame? I don't think so! Violence surrounds todays' day and age, and the majority of us get on with it none the less. Even Mario has his own form of violence bouncing on people's heads, and so does football, so right now no one is in the position to blame anything!
Go and pick on somebody your own size. Bullies.
See you now, Tekken 4 awaits!
Thanks for reading
Dr~Z~
Grand Theft Auto, Unreal Tournament and State Of Emergency are all games that contain a high amount of violence and for some reason people use games like these as easy targets. They ridiculously accuse games for such mad and violent acts of young children, mainly in America, who probably had serious psychological problems already. Okay, blah blah blah, it has been tested and proven that the bad tempered aggression of humans after playing a fighting game like Soul Blade increases, but did they tell you that it was probably because the person they tested was not very good at the game and kept on losing? Well, of course they would get angry! Who wouldn't if you were forced to fight a losing battle for about an hour non-stop, in a white room closely surrounded by walls? It's enough to drive anyone insane and yes, make them more angry.
Propagand. They can majorly twist things about can't they? Take the Daily Mail for instance. Not only the fact that their bringing the issue up after two innocent people had to be killed, but now the police have realised something has to be done about gun crime and how easy it is to get hold of a weapon nowadays. Now, because of this incident, the Daily Mail found it massively neccessary to bring up an issue that happened way back where two males disputed over who won in Street Fighter, which led to violence. Why are they saying this now? Why did they not say anything sooner? Just typical. They were obviously trying to undermine gaming for what it is and that I do not agree with.
They should just give it a rest and think of a way to solve the solution rather than blaming industries. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if the papers themselves weren't to blame for violence, they talk so much rubbish. I'm very sensitive to anything that undermines gaming because they just don't know! It makes me wonder if they've actually played a game in their life? You simply have to try it before rinsing it, or else you have no case at all.
Yes, there are a lot of violent games around, but compared to films they are such a minor party. And in actual fact, games are films are pretty similar, except for the fact that you "watch" films and "play" games. When you finish watching a movie like 'Die Another Day' in the cinema, it doesn't exactly warp your mind and encourage you to pursue world domination does it? (it doesn't for me anyway) So, how much more a video game? Something so delicate and harmless created for fun and enjoyment, to benefit people. Something that began as something very small and indeed received some encouragement from businesses around it is now becoming the centre of attention for blame of too much violence in the world. You cannot be serious!
Fair enough, computer games give anyone that decides to play them thoroughly a compelling experience, but unless there is something already mentally wrong with you it doesn't just at that moment create evil and wicked thoughts in your head. It must have built up and been encouraged somehow, especially with mad hardcore bands planting evil thoughts in youngsters minds. Young minds grow with what constantly surrounds them, so games cannot really be blamed for violence. All us gamers today are proof of that. We constantly play our beloved games, but you haven't seen us rob any banks, start unnecessary fights or kill anyone. It's just not fair to pick on an industry just when it's finally starting to show true potential for the future.
I mean George Bush isn't exactly showing a good example is he? He obviously doesn't want to hear Saddam out, and just because he's ready for war he thinks he must confront countries like Iraq and North Korea about Nuclear weapons. They obviously won't use their weapons if they have no threat, unless they were mad, so why bother them? Games have also been blamed for being racist in the past and this situation with Saddam doesn't exactly soften the blow towards extremists does it? I mean come on! How can such a quality game like Hitman be brought down because of its violent content towards a particular group? It's not just that group that gets killed in the "game" is it? Other people, white, black etc are there as well. Has gaming become such an easy target? I mean, we've seen loads of games in the past that demanded you to shoot down certain people, but nobody complained. So why's everybody shouting their mouths off now? Is it because of the new human rights laws? Well, pants to human rights laws if it is!
Games (after the invention of Kung Fu) is definitely one of the best things that's ever happened to the world. It's brought people together and is one of the main reasons technology is getting better every day. If anything influenced anyone, it's films, after all, most action games nowadays get their ideas from films and in many ways try to follow films because of how successful they have become. All this racism and violence is total nonsense, and computer games are to blame? I don't think so! Violence surrounds todays' day and age, and the majority of us get on with it none the less. Even Mario has his own form of violence bouncing on people's heads, and so does football, so right now no one is in the position to blame anything!
Go and pick on somebody your own size. Bullies.
See you now, Tekken 4 awaits!
Thanks for reading
Dr~Z~
maddmun wrote:
> That's because George Bush has been playing too much Conflict: Desert
> Storm lately.
Coincidentally, that's another fine example to the ludacricy of the matter. Conflict: Desert Storm is quite a violent game that sees you try and stop terrorism, and it's quite a good game from what I've played, but it doesn't MAKE you try it out yourself does it?
It's only there for pure entertainment (and for developers to make money) so screw those political bullies blaming our gaming culture as a source of influence. The only influence coming from anywhere would be from their own sick minds!
> That's because George Bush has been playing too much Conflict: Desert
> Storm lately.
Coincidentally, that's another fine example to the ludacricy of the matter. Conflict: Desert Storm is quite a violent game that sees you try and stop terrorism, and it's quite a good game from what I've played, but it doesn't MAKE you try it out yourself does it?
It's only there for pure entertainment (and for developers to make money) so screw those political bullies blaming our gaming culture as a source of influence. The only influence coming from anywhere would be from their own sick minds!
Or losing brain cells by hitting his head on a brick wall.
That's because George Bush has been playing too much Conflict: Desert Storm lately.
I'm sure many of you receive it all the time, the rambling voices of complaint coming from your parents complaining that you spend too much time on computer games. But why just games? Isn't television much more of a distraction? I don't know about you, but every time I got that treatment I never felt good about it, like I had been given the responsibility to show people that gaming isn't so bad after all.
Grand Theft Auto, Unreal Tournament and State Of Emergency are all games that contain a high amount of violence and for some reason people use games like these as easy targets. They ridiculously accuse games for such mad and violent acts of young children, mainly in America, who probably had serious psychological problems already. Okay, blah blah blah, it has been tested and proven that the bad tempered aggression of humans after playing a fighting game like Soul Blade increases, but did they tell you that it was probably because the person they tested was not very good at the game and kept on losing? Well, of course they would get angry! Who wouldn't if you were forced to fight a losing battle for about an hour non-stop, in a white room closely surrounded by walls? It's enough to drive anyone insane and yes, make them more angry.
Propagand. They can majorly twist things about can't they? Take the Daily Mail for instance. Not only the fact that their bringing the issue up after two innocent people had to be killed, but now the police have realised something has to be done about gun crime and how easy it is to get hold of a weapon nowadays. Now, because of this incident, the Daily Mail found it massively neccessary to bring up an issue that happened way back where two males disputed over who won in Street Fighter, which led to violence. Why are they saying this now? Why did they not say anything sooner? Just typical. They were obviously trying to undermine gaming for what it is and that I do not agree with.
They should just give it a rest and think of a way to solve the solution rather than blaming industries. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if the papers themselves weren't to blame for violence, they talk so much rubbish. I'm very sensitive to anything that undermines gaming because they just don't know! It makes me wonder if they've actually played a game in their life? You simply have to try it before rinsing it, or else you have no case at all.
Yes, there are a lot of violent games around, but compared to films they are such a minor party. And in actual fact, games are films are pretty similar, except for the fact that you "watch" films and "play" games. When you finish watching a movie like 'Die Another Day' in the cinema, it doesn't exactly warp your mind and encourage you to pursue world domination does it? (it doesn't for me anyway) So, how much more a video game? Something so delicate and harmless created for fun and enjoyment, to benefit people. Something that began as something very small and indeed received some encouragement from businesses around it is now becoming the centre of attention for blame of too much violence in the world. You cannot be serious!
Fair enough, computer games give anyone that decides to play them thoroughly a compelling experience, but unless there is something already mentally wrong with you it doesn't just at that moment create evil and wicked thoughts in your head. It must have built up and been encouraged somehow, especially with mad hardcore bands planting evil thoughts in youngsters minds. Young minds grow with what constantly surrounds them, so games cannot really be blamed for violence. All us gamers today are proof of that. We constantly play our beloved games, but you haven't seen us rob any banks, start unnecessary fights or kill anyone. It's just not fair to pick on an industry just when it's finally starting to show true potential for the future.
I mean George Bush isn't exactly showing a good example is he? He obviously doesn't want to hear Saddam out, and just because he's ready for war he thinks he must confront countries like Iraq and North Korea about Nuclear weapons. They obviously won't use their weapons if they have no threat, unless they were mad, so why bother them? Games have also been blamed for being racist in the past and this situation with Saddam doesn't exactly soften the blow towards extremists does it? I mean come on! How can such a quality game like Hitman be brought down because of its violent content towards a particular group? It's not just that group that gets killed in the "game" is it? Other people, white, black etc are there as well. Has gaming become such an easy target? I mean, we've seen loads of games in the past that demanded you to shoot down certain people, but nobody complained. So why's everybody shouting their mouths off now? Is it because of the new human rights laws? Well, pants to human rights laws if it is!
Games (after the invention of Kung Fu) is definitely one of the best things that's ever happened to the world. It's brought people together and is one of the main reasons technology is getting better every day. If anything influenced anyone, it's films, after all, most action games nowadays get their ideas from films and in many ways try to follow films because of how successful they have become. All this racism and violence is total nonsense, and computer games are to blame? I don't think so! Violence surrounds todays' day and age, and the majority of us get on with it none the less. Even Mario has his own form of violence bouncing on people's heads, and so does football, so right now no one is in the position to blame anything!
Go and pick on somebody your own size. Bullies.
See you now, Tekken 4 awaits!
Thanks for reading
Dr~Z~
Grand Theft Auto, Unreal Tournament and State Of Emergency are all games that contain a high amount of violence and for some reason people use games like these as easy targets. They ridiculously accuse games for such mad and violent acts of young children, mainly in America, who probably had serious psychological problems already. Okay, blah blah blah, it has been tested and proven that the bad tempered aggression of humans after playing a fighting game like Soul Blade increases, but did they tell you that it was probably because the person they tested was not very good at the game and kept on losing? Well, of course they would get angry! Who wouldn't if you were forced to fight a losing battle for about an hour non-stop, in a white room closely surrounded by walls? It's enough to drive anyone insane and yes, make them more angry.
Propagand. They can majorly twist things about can't they? Take the Daily Mail for instance. Not only the fact that their bringing the issue up after two innocent people had to be killed, but now the police have realised something has to be done about gun crime and how easy it is to get hold of a weapon nowadays. Now, because of this incident, the Daily Mail found it massively neccessary to bring up an issue that happened way back where two males disputed over who won in Street Fighter, which led to violence. Why are they saying this now? Why did they not say anything sooner? Just typical. They were obviously trying to undermine gaming for what it is and that I do not agree with.
They should just give it a rest and think of a way to solve the solution rather than blaming industries. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if the papers themselves weren't to blame for violence, they talk so much rubbish. I'm very sensitive to anything that undermines gaming because they just don't know! It makes me wonder if they've actually played a game in their life? You simply have to try it before rinsing it, or else you have no case at all.
Yes, there are a lot of violent games around, but compared to films they are such a minor party. And in actual fact, games are films are pretty similar, except for the fact that you "watch" films and "play" games. When you finish watching a movie like 'Die Another Day' in the cinema, it doesn't exactly warp your mind and encourage you to pursue world domination does it? (it doesn't for me anyway) So, how much more a video game? Something so delicate and harmless created for fun and enjoyment, to benefit people. Something that began as something very small and indeed received some encouragement from businesses around it is now becoming the centre of attention for blame of too much violence in the world. You cannot be serious!
Fair enough, computer games give anyone that decides to play them thoroughly a compelling experience, but unless there is something already mentally wrong with you it doesn't just at that moment create evil and wicked thoughts in your head. It must have built up and been encouraged somehow, especially with mad hardcore bands planting evil thoughts in youngsters minds. Young minds grow with what constantly surrounds them, so games cannot really be blamed for violence. All us gamers today are proof of that. We constantly play our beloved games, but you haven't seen us rob any banks, start unnecessary fights or kill anyone. It's just not fair to pick on an industry just when it's finally starting to show true potential for the future.
I mean George Bush isn't exactly showing a good example is he? He obviously doesn't want to hear Saddam out, and just because he's ready for war he thinks he must confront countries like Iraq and North Korea about Nuclear weapons. They obviously won't use their weapons if they have no threat, unless they were mad, so why bother them? Games have also been blamed for being racist in the past and this situation with Saddam doesn't exactly soften the blow towards extremists does it? I mean come on! How can such a quality game like Hitman be brought down because of its violent content towards a particular group? It's not just that group that gets killed in the "game" is it? Other people, white, black etc are there as well. Has gaming become such an easy target? I mean, we've seen loads of games in the past that demanded you to shoot down certain people, but nobody complained. So why's everybody shouting their mouths off now? Is it because of the new human rights laws? Well, pants to human rights laws if it is!
Games (after the invention of Kung Fu) is definitely one of the best things that's ever happened to the world. It's brought people together and is one of the main reasons technology is getting better every day. If anything influenced anyone, it's films, after all, most action games nowadays get their ideas from films and in many ways try to follow films because of how successful they have become. All this racism and violence is total nonsense, and computer games are to blame? I don't think so! Violence surrounds todays' day and age, and the majority of us get on with it none the less. Even Mario has his own form of violence bouncing on people's heads, and so does football, so right now no one is in the position to blame anything!
Go and pick on somebody your own size. Bullies.
See you now, Tekken 4 awaits!
Thanks for reading
Dr~Z~