The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Why is it that just about everyone I know who doesn't play games decribe them as a "waste of time", "really violent", or "yeah, they're for geeks"?
Though the number of people who play games is increasing all the time, people who don't generally dismiss them as violent and time-wasting. I can see where the idea comes from - original consoles and early PCs did not have the processing and graphical power to produce very many popular games which did not involve mindless shooting of enemies. When games were played using impossible interfaces and awkward controls, I can see why they were often thought to be for "lonely geeks". They are also sometimes said to be for people who aren't clever enough to do anything else. Some people also say that they are too violent, and don't have the sense to compare this with television and music (a la Eminem)
Today, however, the truth, as far as I can see, is very different. There are still some popular games which involve mindless shooting, but these are growing less and less every day. Even a game classified as a non-strategic FPS, usually demands something more than mindless shooting. Going from that extreme, there are many excellent FPS' which have very strong strategic elements, and then totally strategic wargames, and many games which either contain no or very little in terms of war and violence, and still can be very good.
So as far as I can see, this is really an old-fashioned and out of date opinion that seems to have stuck. Most good games have much more than just violence, and are pretty simple to learn how to play. As for being too easy, there are some games (especially on the PC) which require immense thought and concentration. All of this critisism seems to be unfair on gaming in general, and the one part of it which seems to bear some truth, that some games are too violent, is often the whole point in the game. Surely the idea of gaming is to let you do something which you can't do in real life! If this means killing people/monsters, then so what? As long as this is repeated in real life, it doesn't matter! If someone, after playing Quake 3, decides to find a gun and look for some zombies to shoot, then there was clearly something wrong with this person before they started to play the game! Accusing the manufacturers of a game in this instance (as has happened in the past), is totally ridiculous - they didn't mean anyone to try and repeat in real-life what they saw on the game!
Though the number of people who play games is increasing all the time, people who don't generally dismiss them as violent and time-wasting. I can see where the idea comes from - original consoles and early PCs did not have the processing and graphical power to produce very many popular games which did not involve mindless shooting of enemies. When games were played using impossible interfaces and awkward controls, I can see why they were often thought to be for "lonely geeks". They are also sometimes said to be for people who aren't clever enough to do anything else. Some people also say that they are too violent, and don't have the sense to compare this with television and music (a la Eminem)
Today, however, the truth, as far as I can see, is very different. There are still some popular games which involve mindless shooting, but these are growing less and less every day. Even a game classified as a non-strategic FPS, usually demands something more than mindless shooting. Going from that extreme, there are many excellent FPS' which have very strong strategic elements, and then totally strategic wargames, and many games which either contain no or very little in terms of war and violence, and still can be very good.
So as far as I can see, this is really an old-fashioned and out of date opinion that seems to have stuck. Most good games have much more than just violence, and are pretty simple to learn how to play. As for being too easy, there are some games (especially on the PC) which require immense thought and concentration. All of this critisism seems to be unfair on gaming in general, and the one part of it which seems to bear some truth, that some games are too violent, is often the whole point in the game. Surely the idea of gaming is to let you do something which you can't do in real life! If this means killing people/monsters, then so what? As long as this is repeated in real life, it doesn't matter! If someone, after playing Quake 3, decides to find a gun and look for some zombies to shoot, then there was clearly something wrong with this person before they started to play the game! Accusing the manufacturers of a game in this instance (as has happened in the past), is totally ridiculous - they didn't mean anyone to try and repeat in real-life what they saw on the game!
Why is it that just about everyone I know who doesn't play games decribe them as a "waste of time", "really violent", or "yeah, they're for geeks"?
Though the number of people who play games is increasing all the time, people who don't generally dismiss them as violent and time-wasting. I can see where the idea comes from - original consoles and early PCs did not have the processing and graphical power to produce very many popular games which did not involve mindless shooting of enemies. When games were played using impossible interfaces and awkward controls, I can see why they were often thought to be for "lonely geeks". They are also sometimes said to be for people who aren't clever enough to do anything else. Some people also say that they are too violent, and don't have the sense to compare this with television and music (a la Eminem)
Today, however, the truth, as far as I can see, is very different. There are still some popular games which involve mindless shooting, but these are growing less and less every day. Even a game classified as a non-strategic FPS, usually demands something more than mindless shooting. Going from that extreme, there are many excellent FPS' which have very strong strategic elements, and then totally strategic wargames, and many games which either contain no or very little in terms of war and violence, and still can be very good.
So as far as I can see, this is really an old-fashioned and out of date opinion that seems to have stuck. Most good games have much more than just violence, and are pretty simple to learn how to play. As for being too easy, there are some games (especially on the PC) which require immense thought and concentration. All of this critisism seems to be unfair on gaming in general, and the one part of it which seems to bear some truth, that some games are too violent, is often the whole point in the game. Surely the idea of gaming is to let you do something which you can't do in real life! If this means killing people/monsters, then so what? As long as this is repeated in real life, it doesn't matter! If someone, after playing Quake 3, decides to find a gun and look for some zombies to shoot, then there was clearly something wrong with this person before they started to play the game! Accusing the manufacturers of a game in this instance (as has happened in the past), is totally ridiculous - they didn't mean anyone to try and repeat in real-life what they saw on the game!
Though the number of people who play games is increasing all the time, people who don't generally dismiss them as violent and time-wasting. I can see where the idea comes from - original consoles and early PCs did not have the processing and graphical power to produce very many popular games which did not involve mindless shooting of enemies. When games were played using impossible interfaces and awkward controls, I can see why they were often thought to be for "lonely geeks". They are also sometimes said to be for people who aren't clever enough to do anything else. Some people also say that they are too violent, and don't have the sense to compare this with television and music (a la Eminem)
Today, however, the truth, as far as I can see, is very different. There are still some popular games which involve mindless shooting, but these are growing less and less every day. Even a game classified as a non-strategic FPS, usually demands something more than mindless shooting. Going from that extreme, there are many excellent FPS' which have very strong strategic elements, and then totally strategic wargames, and many games which either contain no or very little in terms of war and violence, and still can be very good.
So as far as I can see, this is really an old-fashioned and out of date opinion that seems to have stuck. Most good games have much more than just violence, and are pretty simple to learn how to play. As for being too easy, there are some games (especially on the PC) which require immense thought and concentration. All of this critisism seems to be unfair on gaming in general, and the one part of it which seems to bear some truth, that some games are too violent, is often the whole point in the game. Surely the idea of gaming is to let you do something which you can't do in real life! If this means killing people/monsters, then so what? As long as this is repeated in real life, it doesn't matter! If someone, after playing Quake 3, decides to find a gun and look for some zombies to shoot, then there was clearly something wrong with this person before they started to play the game! Accusing the manufacturers of a game in this instance (as has happened in the past), is totally ridiculous - they didn't mean anyone to try and repeat in real-life what they saw on the game!
The smart a§s answer to this question which (coincidently) I am going to say is, "Do non gamers actually care about gaming?"
The smart a§s answer to which is, "no"
The smart a§s answer to which is, "no"
Ah sod reality. I'm off to fly in my X-Wing, be back in a hour...
Perhaps as a small peak into a larger world...
You could say that I'm trying to preach to the converting by putting that here, but I think that's the whole point; non-gamers don't take gaming seriously, and cast it aside as stupid and non-productive!
I you think about parents and friends of gamers, then yes, they do sometimes care about it, even if they do not take it seriously!