In today's news...

[Sinfulwolf]

Re: In today's news...

Silly Americans. Really, as long as it doesn't get stupid like that up here, I'll be content.

As it is, I still think it's bullshit. People seem to think that harping on the "evils" of video games is going to get people to stop. It hasn't worked yet, and the only reason 13 old kids are cluttering my ear full of incessant chatter on Halo Reach is because their damn parents do zero research into what their kids are doing.

So yeah, if you want to actually think of the children, get off your lazy fucking ass do some research. Better yet, think of the 22 year olds who just want to enjoy a quiet game and don't buy the game for your idiot, chatterbox fuckhead of a child.

Done and done.

 

[maikochan]

Re: In today's news...

I was in a game store some time ago, waiting in line. The woman in front of me had a kid, maybe around 10-13 or so (I'm horrible with ages) and was buying some GTA game. When they left, I mentioned that to the clerk and he basically said that, since it was the mother buying it, there was nothing he could do. These guys at the front lines have their hands tied, and if they do mention to the oblivious parent that the game is rated Mature and ask if they really want their kids playing that game, they risk getting yelled at by the parent. Perhaps instead of trying to make the game makers into villains, money could be better spent educating parents about the ESRB and the kinds of games they might want their kids to play.

I'm not letting the game manufacturer's off the hook totally though. I can understand them following the market with their games, marketing them to the 20+ male demographic, but it seems that there is a disproportionate amount of advertising for the GTA/God of War type games than for more 'kiddie' games. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like Nintendo is the only company that hasn't followed the aging gamers exclusivly.

Heck, according to that bill, even Mario bros. could be classified as lacking any "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value". Or Tetris for that matter. TETRIS! The only game left in the world where you don't hurt anything and don't compete with anyone. I miss Tetris...

 

[Quartz]

Re: In today's news...

Heck, according to that bill, even Mario bros. could be classified as lacking any "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value". Or Tetris for that matter. TETRIS! The only game left in the world where you don't hurt anything and don't compete with anyone. I miss Tetris...

Yeah, it was kind of weird how they worded it with the

You must be registered to see the links

in mind, when games clearly are not obscene under it. The legal bar for demonstrating "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" is actually quite low as well, and I would imagine games would easily pass it.

 

[Kusanagi]

Re: In today's news...

I miss Tetris...

You must be registered to see the links

Politicians either don't understand that it's not SOLELY AND ENTIRELY the fault of those who made the game, or they do, but they want to get re-elected, so instead of trying to educate the idiot consumers, they simply go with what the uninformed public wants.

Until the 'gamer' generation comes to power, we will continually have cases like this popping up. Hell, even long after that, we'll probably STILL have cases like this, though possibly not to the same degree. For the silliness to stop, people need to be informed, and, unfortunately, there are a lot who don't want to be informed, just told what to do.

All that said, yes, the people who make the game and ESPECIALLY the retail stores have to take responsibility as well. I'd love to see a store in which sales clerks, who notice that the customer is buying the game for little 10-year-old Billy over there, ask if the buyer knows the contents of the game. Unfortunately, that would prevent a sale, and < insert deity of worship here > FORBID you lose a sale and instead help to educate a customer. That's the way it goes, though. Bottom line of any company is to

You must be registered to see the links

.

As for the people who made the game... about the only thing I can fault devs/pubs on is that there are a lot out there who are trying to "grow up" with the gamers out there. Which can be fine and all, I enjoy God of War, Devil May Cry, etc., but where are all the games like 'Splosion Man, Earthbound, or Ristar? Sure, Nintendo has a bunch of games like that, but what of the other guys? Just because most of the people that own a PS3 or 360 are 20-40, doesn't mean you need to make games where the focus is blood, violence, and implied sexual activities.


TL;DR:
Really, at the end of the day, the reason shit like this happens is an uninformed public that refuses to inform itself, or even let itself be informed.

 

[Incubus]

Re: In today's news...

TETRIS! The only game left in the world where you don't hurt anything and don't compete with anyone. I miss Tetris...

Don't hurt anything? Think of the millions of dollars in property damage you're causing!

 

[lurker]

Re: In today's news...

Don't hurt anything? Think of the millions of dollars in property damage you're causing!

Property damage is Ghostbusters. You must be thinking of Silviot Tetris.

 

[Nunu]

Re: In today's news...

I'm not letting the game manufacturer's off the hook totally though. I can understand them following the market with their games, marketing them to the 20+ male demographic, but it seems that there is a disproportionate amount of advertising for the GTA/God of War type games than for more 'kiddie' games. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like Nintendo is the only company that hasn't followed the aging gamers exclusivly.

statistics say most gamers are in their late 20's early 30's. is it wrong to make games for the majority?

but for allyour moaning its no australia, most GTAs get banned here because we still dont have an R rating, i mean games are for kids anyway right?

 

[Incubus]

Re: In today's news...

but for allyour moaning its no australia, most GTAs get banned here because we still dont have an R rating, i mean games are for kids anyway right?

You say this like it's a bad thing. We've still got about 50 different varieties of "Yet another sandbox crime game" as it is.

 

[SirOni]

Re: In today's news...

It hasn't worked yet, and the only reason 13 old kids are cluttering my ear full of incessant chatter on Halo Reach is because their damn parents do zero research into what their kids are doing.

The option to mute people is there for a reason. You know, unless you're like me and want to troll the annoying sacks of shit.

 

[Quartz]

Re: In today's news...

Doesn't Xbox live have that option to only receive voice from folks on your friends list? Because I would turn that shit on so fast. I have never heard anything of value come from voice chat with random cretins on the internet.

 

[SirOni]

Re: In today's news...

Dunno, I haven't bothered checking. All I know is that I mute annoying people straight away in Reach.

 

[Sinfulwolf]

Re: In today's news...

The option to mute people is there for a reason. You know, unless you're like me and want to troll the annoying sacks of shit.

Oh, I do use that option, but that's not entirely my point. Yes I can mute them, but I shouldn't have to.

 

[Rule 34]

Re: In today's news...

So apparently the American Senate is planning to create a blacklist of internet sites that providers would have to block.
An organisation called demand progress have put up an online petition to try and stop it. I don't normally get active for political issues, but this is one I'm wholeheartedly behind. Click the link in my signature for further information and to sign the petition.
Even if you're not American, it could still be in your interest to sign this, because unfortunately many countries are "monkey see, monkey do" when it comes to the USA.

 

[Nunu]

Re: In today's news...

hah your copying australia's retardation now!

its great because europe has tried internet filtering and black listing and are phasing it out in favour of... education! black lists and filters are 10 years out of date and putting one up now is like equipping our army with muskets because they are high calibre weapons.

my favourite part was when a pet grooming store went out of businiss because some idiot black listed them. and then its not like anyone told them, just nope, no more web site.

 

[moomoo78]

Re: In today's news...

no need for a petition the blocks for this are already in place aka the constitution and the bill of rights something about freedom of speech...
basicly they would have to repeal a good sized chuck of what the country is based on if the old farts want to keep their senate seats they wont pass it and i think most of em know this

 

[Quartz]

Re: In today's news...

Wow, that bill seriously looks like it was written by the RIAA. The new Attorney General's office responsibilities outlined are all regarding making it simple for complaints to be filed, and there aren't any outlined duties in there regarding recourse for the domain holders. I guess their only recourse is pitting themselves against the DoJ in court? That's kind of shitty.

Also, I wonder how this works with regards to free speech. Like, I understand that speech made while conspiring to violate the law isn't protected, but would the law still be constitutional when a handful of sites get put on the list erroneously? Would the collateral inhibition of completely legitimate free speech be enough to make the whole deal unconstitutional? What about sites that have a large amount of unrelated speech alongside an active pirating community? Is that free speech somehow less protected because it was made in the vicinity of unprotected speech? I hate it when legal stuff like this comes up in the news, because I don't really know enough about it to understand how it will end up working (Or not working, in this case). ><

 

[Newbie]

Re: In today's news...

I'll sign this petition, but the paranoid part of my brain thinks that any petition is more an attempt to gather information than make opinions known.

You must be registered to see the links

This is of note because he left a suicide note 1905 pages long, written over the course of five years. That's dedication.

 

[DarkFire1004]

Re: In today's news...

To be honest, I've thought about doing something like this before as well. I wouldn't commit suicide to escape or because of some spiraling depression. I'd just do it because I want to know what's at the end.

Granted, I wouldn't have the kind of dedication to write an entire textbook's worth of notes, but I guess that's just me.

 

[Incubus]

Re: In today's news...

I could never commit suicide.

It'd reduce my score by 1.

 

[Rule 34]

Re: In today's news...

So this guy wrote a suicide book? Any bets on when it's going to be published?